Breaking News: Noel Hamiel going after blogs and first amendment
“A former newspaper publisher going after the first amendment? What are you talking about PP?”
Well, as usual, you’re hearing about it first at the South Dakota War College.
I’ve spoken with several legislators who have signed on, or are being asked to sign on to a pair of bills being circulated by Hamiel who is apparently directing an attack at bloggers. And more specifically, the free speech of commenters.
One of these measures I’m being told directs those hosting or writing blogs to turn over (upon request) identifying information of commenters. I believe the other is with regards to “libelous” statements allowed to remain out on the internet.
Is he kidding?
Despite this fact, I’m told there’s a long list of legislators who are signing on to this unconstitutional measure. But then again, when has constitutionality ever been an overriding concern when it comes to legislation?
Anonymous free speech has been upheld by the US Supreme Court. And since this measure is coming from what I would assume is a number of aggrieved public officials, I’d also remind them that as public officials their protections are even less, as demonstrated by a SD based Supreme Court case.
Yet, as has been noted to me, Noel is promoting a measure to force blog hosts to provide IP addresses to the offended. We won’t know how much htis bill infringes upon free speech until it hits the hopper, and we can see the full language. But, it still leaves me scratching my head.
Here is a former main stream media journalist who we might assume would go to jail to protect his sources, But when another iteration of the media arises that threatens to supplant his? The main guns are loaded for bear.
At the end of the day, this is a shot across the bow of the blogosphere, and a protective measure for newspapers who are slow to adapt to the leap in technology that has, admittedly, added to the continual erosion of the Mainstream Media’s readership and resources.
But then again, if you’re reading this, you’re adding to their erosion too, since you like your news “breaking” and “electronic.”
If you enjoyed this post, please consider to leave a comment or subscribe to the feed and get future articles delivered to your feed reader.
Comments
Pierre, pass this nutty idea, and I will switch anonymous comments back on, just so I can be the guy to get the law thrown out in court. Put Heidelberger v. Meatheads on the docket!
Any legislator who sign unto that legislation is a big baby. Dissenting our politicians is what makes them do their job better.
There is a huge difference between libel / slander and an opinion. Spoken and published opinions will obviously always be protected by the first amendment.
Just because this is electronic and fairly up to the minute does not give it a get out of jail free card if libelous (known lies or misleading statements, written in this case, used to hurt someone’s business, reputation, etc.) words are printed. The Supreme Court has said the site cannot be held accountable for the words published by others, even though it is hosted by that site. It does not say that the person giving the statement cannot be held accountable, though.
Trying to prove, however, that an anonymous statement was given by one individual and not another (even with an IP address) is next to impossible even with the burden of proof in civil court only being “by preponderance of the evidence.”
Slander and Libel are never protected, no matter where they are spoken or where they are printed (the one exception to this rule in on the senate and house floor), under the first amendment. All that matters is who you go after to sue.
My name is Stan Gibilisco. I live in Lead South Dakota. You can find my name listed in the telephone book. This comment links to my Web site. When I comment on a blog, I want everyone who reads it to know who I am, not only what I stand for. At least then, I’ll think before I click — as long as the caffeine has taken effect.
There wouldn’t even be an issue with blogs if true journalist would actually do their job by fairly reporting the news and not showing favortism to certain issues and certain politicians (ie Argus Leader).
SDMike
My one extended exposure to Noel Hamiel was listening to him rail on a Sioux Falls newspaperman for having the temerity to put newspaper boxes in Mitchell.
My second, much shorter, exposure to Noel Hamiel was to be questioned about my qualifications to hold a job in “his” town.n (It was a job with a private company based in “his” town. Commuters need not apply.)
Thus, the Noel Hamiel I know is perfectly capable of introducing this kind of legislation. The First Amendment, in the view of people like him, belongs to those who own the printing press.
And now, I suppose, I am one of his targets.
Anyone that sponsors/signs onto this measure fails to meet the minimum measure of competency expected of a legislator.
Regardless of party affiliation, bloggers and their supporters are probably some of the most politically active individuals in this state. Almost universally, this is a group that vigorously supports the First Amendment.
I, for one, will look forward to opposing the re-election of anyone supporting this measure.
Please keep us informed of all legislators that support this bill.
Kids:
There is much more to this story. Stay tuned right here to SDWC.
Todd Epp
Middle Border Sun
http://www.middlebordersun.com
Prior to the session, Noel and I talked briefly about this bill. My 2 cents then: It doesn’t matter whether people use their names, a handle or remain anonymous on the interwebs. It’s a public square, and the more the merrier.
If Noel or any lawmaker is reading this, please consider that this type of legislation has been tried before, and it’s never worked. Heck, go all the way back to John Adams and the Alien and Seditions Act, when it was a crime (briefly) to criticize the political class.
Free speech is messy. Always has been, always will be. And that’s as it should be.
Full disclosure: I worked for Noel back in the day. One of the best editors and publishers ever.
“I will switch anonymous comments back”
Cory, I have been over at you site the last few weeks, and you allow anonymous comments all the time. They may not be anonymous to you, but they are to some of your readers. Get real.
And Pat, who are you to talk about First Amendment rights for those who want to remain anonymous after the position you took against the SDCAC.
Yes Pat, you are a hypocrite because you are unprincipled. If the rule helps me out I am for it. When the same rule is against me, I am against it. You protect anonymous bloggers when you agree with them, and out the ones you hate. This is what is wrong with the current political environment. We have rejected the rule of law and replaced it with a rule of men. We have lost, “We the People” and it is now all about special interests. You have heard about the “Good Old Boys”, right?
I’m unprincipled?
As opposed to “the Sibson principles” of..
*Everyone who disagrees is an enemy.
*Embrace God’s love. Unless you hate someone, Then they are satan.
*Sibby is the only one who can determine what a proper education is.
*Sibby sets the standard for who a Republican is. Unless he decides not to be a Republican that day.
*If you challenge sibby you are an enemy for life, and sibby will devote every waking moment to your demise, because grudges are forever.
*Open government and transparency is good, but not when Sibby needs to hide out of state donors funneling money which help to enrich Sibby’s organization.
*It is more important to bark at the moon than to win elections to obtain political legitimacy.
*Run away from any potential challenge.
*And the best of all… SIBBY MUST FIND OUT WHO THE SD BLOG WATCH MAN IS AND WILL NEVER REST UNTIL HE DOES.
I could go on….
Sibson,
Actually, I have found PP to protect anonymous identities of everyone who posts on SDWC, whether or not he agrees with them. He rarely agrees with me and he always has protected my anonymous request.
I agree with the concerns about the Hamiel bill.
Pat, Steve:
Why can’t we all just get along. Be nice! 
If this bill gets filed, we’ll have a rare moment of SDBlogOSphere unity. Epp, Powers, Sibby, and Heidelberger all living together, real wrath of God stuff.
Todd Epp
Middle Border Sun
http://www.middlebordersun.com
10:44
Sorry,
I did not want to imply that Pat outed all that he disagrees with. But I remember at least two cases from this web site plus he outed some Badlands Blue bloggers not too long ago.
And his last statement regarding the SDBWM validated my point that he does protect the ones he agrees with.
And Pat’s latest comment also confirms the point that instead of dealing with political issues in a constructive way, the discussion too often goes into a finger pointing contest with the winner being the one who can dig up the most dirt on the opponent. And the use of anonymity is often used when the attacks become very personal and malicious. So the question becomes, does the First Amendment protect the free speech rights of those who libel and slander others?
Noel Hamiel one of the best editors and publishers ever? That’s the funniest thing I’ve read all day!
wow – not the Noel I know