Michael Brodkorb: "House Democrats Should Be Ashamed"
I couldn't agree more.
The quote is from Michael Brodkorb the author of the blog
Minnesota Democrats Exposed commenting in Pat Kessler's 5 p.m. story on the proposed censorship of journalists at the capitol.
House DFLers are also taking a drubbing from the left with the
Uptake's Jason Barnett also ripping the proposal in Pat's story.
The proposal has been amended to strike the first three provisions which called for journalists to agree not to videotape audience members, individual house members and any interactions before or after the committee convenes or adjourns. For a complete look at the original proposal
click here.The proposal, as it stands now, still represents a troubling narrowing of the definition of a journalist. The Society of Professional Journalists issued this statement this afternoon:
"It's our understanding the first three of the proposed rules are already tossed out, which is a good thing since they triggered the strongest response. However, SPJ is concerned about the rules that continue to try to narrow the definition of what a journalist is and who should be allowed to document the workings of state government.
The Minnesota Legislature does the people's work during committee meetings and formal House and Senate floor sessions. Minnesota SPJ understands the difficulty in maintaining decorum and a productive environment in such open, public forums. However, this is precisely the job legislators were elected to do. Public scrutiny comes with the office. SPJ takes the position that transparency is the only way elected representatives can maintain credibility with their constituents. As such, the best approach is one that adheres to the most noble aspects of the First Amendment that recognizes the need for openness and accountability from government.
It's difficult to understand why the proposed rules place conditions on what should be a simple process of access. SPJ prefers to define 'journalist' in the broadest of terms and we believe it's time for the legislature to do the same. The public loses whenever elected officials choose to exclude people who wish to document what happens in a public meeting, working on public policy in a public space. If there is an issue of decorum, safety or logistical space, elected leaders have appropriate methods in place. Rather than create additional rules that imply a person's credentials will be issued based on where a person works or how long a person will be reporting at the Capitol, SPJ would encourage legislative leaders to lessen the rules to allow more people to report in new and innovative ways to reach more of the public. The Legislature should establish equitable rules for all media, with no bias awarded anyone based on medium, method or viewpoint. If this proposal reflects the Legislature's attempt to do that, they have missed the mark."
The proliferation of bloggers and journalists at the capitol and everywhere allows more people access to more information. It is not, as Rep. Tony Sertich, maintains "a security threat." The capitol has its own police force, after all.
Oops, maybe I shouldn't have said that. Maybe the House leaders will start using capitol police to monitor reporters. Blog readers can provide their own historical references for that kind of a policy.
