After California cops raided the home of Gizmodo blogger Jason Chen, Bloggasm’s Simon Owens talked to some fellow web-savvy journalists about Chen’s position, and the validity of Gawker’s shield-law defense. Here’s what they had to say.
Joan Walsh, Salon:
“The fact that Gizmodo paid for the phone muddies the water a little, but would we really say that reporters/editors for TMZ and the National Enquirer–which also pay for information–aren’t protected?”
Colby Hall, Mediaite:
“The larger question is what is journalism, and the definition of journalism has evolved … Gawker Media notoriously flaunts accepted practices of traditional journalism to great effect. I imagine at the end of the day not a lot will come of this.”
But not everyone agreed. Tony Pierce, blog editor for the LA Times, cited Nick Denton’s own words–“We may inadvertently commit journalism. That is not the institutional intention”–and said:
“Unfortunately I think Gizmodo doesn’t have much of a leg to stand on if their own boss says they don’t really do journalism there.”