Topic: Media Shield Law

Attorney General Eric Holder discusses the "Free Flow of Information Act," a media shield law that would require journalists to be licensed by the government. Holder mentions a "people board" being assembled to oversee the process, which the hosts mock as a violation of the First Amendment. The show concludes with a reminder of the "value for value" model and a sign-off for the next episode.

The discussion examines Glenn Greenwald's appearance on Bill Maher's show and the push for a Media Shield Law. The hosts argue that the government is attempting to define who is a "licensed" journalist to exclude independent internet media and whistleblowers like Edward Snowden.

Adam Curry and John C. Dvorak open episode 548 from Austin, Texas and Northern Silicon Valley. They discuss their signal strength using ham radio terminology before transitioning into a discussion about the Senate's agreement on a media shield law. Dvorak notes he predicted the move toward journalist licensing in his earlier writings about the impact of blogging on traditional media.

The Senate Judiciary Committee approved a media shield law defining "covered journalists" based on specific employment durations and affiliations. The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, featuring mainstream figures like Wolf Blitzer and Andrea Mitchell, supports the bill despite its limitations. Critics argue the law creates an elitist tier of licensed journalists and violates the First Amendment by allowing Congress to define who qualifies for protection.

Glenn Greenwald argues that the possession of classified information is a fundamental component of investigative journalism, citing historical examples like the Pentagon Papers and reports on CIA black sites. The discussion explores the implications of the proposed Media Shield Law, which would legally define who qualifies as a journalist and who receives protection. Greenwald asserts that criminalizing the handling of leaked documents effectively demands that citizens remain ignorant of government actions.

Senate Bill 987, the Media Shield Law, is criticized as an unconstitutional attempt by Congress to define who qualifies as a journalist. Senator Dianne Feinstein added an amendment requiring journalists to be salaried employees or independent contractors of established news entities to receive protection. This definition excludes bloggers and independent media creators, effectively creating a "podcast license" requirement for legal protection.

The hosts review the Department of Justice's new policies regarding subpoenas and search warrants targeting the press. They argue that the administration is pushing for a "Media Shield Law" that would actually codify government interference and define who qualifies as a legitimate journalist, potentially undermining the First Amendment.

The hosts call out Trevor Timm of the Freedom of the Press Foundation for advocating for a media shield law. They argue that Timm, despite his background with the EFF and ACLU, is supporting legislation that would allow the government to decide who is a journalist, which they view as a betrayal of constitutional principles.

Senator Dick Durbin questioned the definition of a journalist in the 21st century during a televised discussion regarding media shield laws. Durbin suggested that while traditional outlets like Fox News and the AP are clearly protected, bloggers and Twitter users may not be entitled to the same constitutional protections under the First Amendment. This perspective draws criticism for ignoring the historical context of 18th-century pamphlets and independent publishing.

The Obama administration's push for a media shield law follows investigations into the Associated Press and Fox News reporters. Critics argue that such a law is redundant because the First Amendment already serves as a shield, and new legislation would likely include national security exceptions that render it ineffective for whistleblowers. Analysis of MSNBC coverage featuring Martin Bashir and Crystal Ball suggests a partisan defense of the administration's transparency record.

President Obama's recent press conference is characterized as the finalization of a police state, covering topics such as drone strikes and media shield laws. The hosts prepare for a deep deconstruction of the administration's announcements in the upcoming Sunday broadcast.