Apple, the CIA & Shield Law
There has been further progress on the iPhone/ Gizmodo debacle that Jess wrote about last week, and the implications it could have for more serious journalistic concerns. On the Media reported April 30th that in order to halt the further investigation into the property of Jason Chen, the Gizmodo blogger who had much of his computing equipment seized, Shield Law was claimed so that he would not need to reveal his sources and how he came about receiving the next generation iPhone prototype. I thought this would be especially relevant to talk about because today is of course World Press Freedom Day, a UN supported day of awareness for governments to uphold the rights of the press.
In the segment On the Media features Johnathan Turley, a law professor from George Washington University, who addresses whether or not Jason Chen should be eligible for Shield Law and how this could effect journalists pursuing more serious matters such as James Risen. Last week New York Times reporter and novelist James Risen was give a Grand Jury Subpoena to reveal his sources for part of what he wrote on a book concerning the CIA. Professor Turley argues that whether or not Jason Chen is able to use Shield Law in his case, he could effect journalists like James Risen, who are actually reporting on subjects important to American freedoms, and that should potentially be protected.
Turley argues that Shield Law should probably not apply to a blogger like Jason Chen. He supposedly paid five thousand dollars for the phone and under California Penal Code Section 485 if an item is found and the owner is known and there is not a proper effort to return the item it is considered stolen. Turley believes that journalists such as Jason Chen could potentially weaken the power of Shield Law, which would be detrimental to our freedom of speech and freedom of press. I’m inclined to agree, and don’t believe what Jason Chen and Gizmodo did should necessarily be protected. I’m a frequent reader of Appleinsider, Macrumours, Gizmodo and Wired, but still believe that what Jason Chen was doing could potentially have been crossing the line. I don’t believe there was enough effort put into returning the phone on the part of the original finder of the phone and it is known that he shopped it around instead of trying to return it to the bar where it was found or Apple.
Similar to Turley’s argument I also believe that if Jason Chen is able to use the fact that he is a blogger halt investigation into how he found this “stolen” good, then why can’t anyone or more importantly any criminal do the same thing. The real question is who is actually a journalist? Twitter is a microblogging service and I definitely have followers I don’t know, does that make me a journalist? I use Facebook all the time and update the status, am I technically reporting then? Even this blog post I’m writing now can be viewed by anyone on the web, and does that make me a writer? I’d say that I am not, and I hope that Shield Law is used for those important cases like Risen’s rather than Chen’s.
1 Comment
Is there nothing to which the answer cannot be found in OTM? Yes, good distinction in practice and good policy arguments. Shield laws are important, and do need (in my opinion) to be revised and perhaps standardized nationally. Today’s reading on Computer Ethics is especially relevant, in that it made the point that computers can create affordances for which policy has not been made.
And happy World Press Freedom Day! Who else is celebrating with the traditional “Beat the Censor” piñata?