Report from L.A.

Being a journalist isn't easy. And it's getting harder every day. As part of the most recent Society of Professional Journalists national convention in Los Angeles, several sessions noted just how tough it is becoming, documenting some of the dangers and difficulties associated with being a journalist. Here's a brief account of some of material brought forth in those sessions.

Human Rights Code

Although Canada has similar free speech rights as the United States, in 1993 the government passed a Human Rights Code that allows for the establishment of a Tribunal, which is separate from the court system, to hear cases of what it feels are violations of discriminatory speech laws.

The Tribunal was justified and established by the government as a means of limiting extremist organizations that print discriminatory and "hate" material, said Roger McConchie, a Vancouver-based attorney, although only complaints against mainstream newspapers have been made to date.

In May 1997 a commercial newspaper, the North Shore News, was the first paper to face the Tribunal when it was forced to defend an opinion column against an accusation that it violated the content standards of the statute. Similar cases are also underway in Ontario and Saskatchewan.

The Human Rights Code prohibits speech that "(a) indicates discrimination or an intention to discriminate against a person or a group or class of persons, or (b) is likely to expose a person or a group or class of persons to hatred or contempt...because of the race, color, ancestry, place or origin, religion, marital status, family status, physical or mental disability, sex, sexual orientation, or age of that person or that group or class of persons."

And, said McConchie, arguments made to the Tribunal and the decisions it renders are virtually indefensible. Innocent intent, truth, fair comment on true facts, publication in the public interest and genuine artistic merit defenses do not apply.

The government justified the establishment of the Tribunal on behalf of "vulnerable" people and groups because, it claims, the press is "the kind of powerful private institution that is capable of diminishing the rights and freedoms of the vulnerable." Plus, freedom of the press carries with it an obligation to exercise that right responsibly, and since editors and journalists have "disproportionate access" as to the content of what's published, the government has a legitimate role in redressing this imbalance, it claimed.

The case against the News was eventually dismissed by the Tribunal after a month-long trial and four months of deliberations, and after readers of the newspaper helped raise $150,000 for its defense fund. However, other cases continue.

Paparazzi Bill

Celebrities in Hollywood have often complained of being stalked and chased by members of the media, and following the death of Princess Diana, who was killed while being chased by a hoard of photographers, a wave of sympathy swept through California legislators and led to the passing of a little known but dangerously limiting law that is now in effect known as the Paparazzi Bill.

Megan Gray, a lawyer with the Texas-based law firm Baker & Hostetler who outlined the legislation, noted that it is now illegal in California to attempt to capture a photo or rendering of anyone else engaging in "personal or familial acts" that one would assume to be a private moment.

The bill, she said, tries to protect privacy, but sidesteps the traditional First Amendment claims and is also unfairly targeted at journalists. It focuses on the techniques of news gathering and not the issues, she said, and is proving to be a danger to journalists in several ways.

One problem, she said, lies in the vague nature of the language. Exactly what is a "personal or familial" act? Under previous court definitions, she said, even something as common as a handshake would qualify.

Two, the legislation pushes the illegality of the offense beyond the publishing of such material, and now actually makes it illegal to ATTEMPT to get such a photo or rendering.

And, three, it restricts the gathering of such material from beyond actual trespassing, which is already against the law. Now the gathering of such material is illegal if it is done with such common methods as with a telephoto lens or microphone with extended power.

The liability for breaking this law, she said, is very extensive and includes possible punitive damages. And it's liability can be stretched to beyond the invader himself to include anyone who induces him, such as his boss or the editor of a magazine who said he would pay for such a photo.

Other similar bills are in the works, she said, including the Bono Bill and the Feinstein Bill. Those bills, though, are more limited to stalking, assault and battery.

Skip is an editor for Cincinnati Magazine and is Cincinnati SPJ President.