QUICKLINK Montana · September 4, 2008 · Reporter's privilege
Anonymous bloggers protected by shield law, judge finds
Keywords: Confidential source issues; Defamation; Libel; Montana; Shield Law
|
|
A group of anonymous commenters on a Montana newspaper Web site can stay that way thanks to a Montana District Court judge’s ruling Wednesday.
Judge Todd Baugh granted the Billings Gazette’s motion to quash a subpoena issued by a former candidate for local public office, the newspaper reported. The candidate, Russ Doty, had brought a libel suit against his opponent, Brad Molnar, in the 2004 election for the Billings Public Service Commission. In the course of the lawsuit, Doty issued a subpoena to the Gazette, which wasn't a party in the case, seeking the identity of two people who had posted comments about Doty anonymously on the newspaper’s Web site.
Specifically, Doty sought the identity of two bloggers, going by the monikers "CutiePie" and "Always wondering," whom Doty thought might be Molnar in disguise, the Gazzette's attorney Martha Sheehy said. Doty also argued that even if they were not Molnar, the bloggers would be helpful witnesses to prove the extent of his reputation damage.
The subpoena also requested "all electronic information. . . including but not limited to IP addresses, e-mail addresses, and other identity and contact information" for Molnar, the Gazette reported.
In granting the newspaper’s motion to quash the subpoena, the judge found that the anonymous bloggers were protected by the Montana shield law, known as the Media Confidentiality Act. The law protects news organizations, as well as “any person connected with or employed by [a news organization] for the purpose of gathering, writing, editing, or disseminating news.”
Though the law does not explicitly include bloggers or online commenters within its protection, the judge agreed with the Gazette that online commenters are sufficiently connected to the newspaper to warrant protection.
This was the first case dealing with anonymous bloggers in Montana that Sheehy knew of, she said. She was pleased with the victory, but not surprised: the shield law there is broad, she pointed out, so it protects not just anonymous sources, but also any information gathered or obtained by news organizations.
"There are similarities between old and new technology," Sheehy said. "If a person's speech is anonymous in the printed newspaper, the statute protects it. This is anonymous speech in a different form."
— Samantha Fredrickson, 5:12 pm
Comments: (5)
Comment by Russ Doty, Sat, Sep 6, 2008, 2:05pm
Interesting that the person who wrote this story apparently interviewed Martha after the hearing but did not interview me. Curious things have happened since this reverberated throughout the national media. The link to the original Billings Gazette story above produces a chain of bloggers that I had not seen before and a different rating on the story than this link http://www.billingsgazette.net/articles/2008/09/04/news/local/35-privacy.txt where you will find posts by me, one of the persons who
Comment by Russ Doty, Sat, Sep 6, 2008, 2:07pm
whose identity I sought gloating over the ruling and by the person I am suing and some of his detractors. You may want to check out the thoughts I have on whose freedom of expression this ruling really damages. The story also did not mention that I sought identity of “always, wondering,” a person who insisted I had claimed to be an attorney when I wasn’t. It took me considerable time to answer that one. I thought it was careless disregard of facts he/she could have easily checked. You can judge
Comment by Russ Doty, Sat, Sep 6, 2008, 2:09pm
for yourself where you as a reporter would have published that allegation and should have been protected if you did. See http://www.billingsgazette.net/articles/2007/12/29/opinion/guest/60-unethical.txt
I have no clue why the two threads for one story exist. I suspect it happens occasionally in the case of the Gazette because I have seen some threads seem to start over again. That would mean you could get libeled and not even know it unless you had access to both treads. Also, for some
Comment by Russ Doty, Sat, Sep 6, 2008, 2:10pm
some reason I had to post my two comments twice before they appeared. Rather than being a rogue editor, I suspect that is some kind of a timeout glitch that stops the post if you take too long to check your facts while writing it. So what I said was not viewed by a number of folks who may have looked at the posts earlier.
I sought information that would have revealed whether or not my detractors were really one person making reference to my diminished reputation under several names or
Comment by Russ Doty, Sat, Sep 6, 2008, 2:11pm
using the pseudonyms of friends or relatives. We know that corporations hire shills to post on websites and “create” public opinion. That is not a speech that needs to be shielded.
Submit a comment
• RSS feed
News categories:
News keywords: