Skip to content

Blogging and the 1st Amendment Panel Discussion at Marshall University

The West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals convened at Marshall University this week and included a panel, moderated by Supreme Court Chief Justice Brent Benjamin entitled Blogging and the Potential Limits of the First Amendment. The press release promises live stream from the University’s website.

Panelist include:

  • Lucy Dalglish, executive director of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press in Washington, D.C.
  • Gene Policinski, vice president and executive director of the First Amendment Center at Vanderbilt University
  • Howard J. Bashman, an appellate attorney in suburban Philadelphia who is also a well-known blogger
  • Kevin Qualls, an attorney who is on the faculty at Murray State University in Kentucky
  • Dean Corley Dennison Marshall University School of Journalism

Chief Justice Brent Benjamin said of the panel:

“As more and more Americans engage in online blogging, questions arise as to how and when the First Amendment should apply,” he said. “An outstanding panel has been put together to discuss and explore these issues. I believe this forum promises to be informative.”

Marshall University Press Release: West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals to convene at Marshall University as part of Constitution Week

WOWK TV: Marshall University Panel to Ponder Blogging and the 1st Amendment

No related posts.

Posted in Academia.

2 comments

By Luke Gilman – September 22, 2009

2 Responses to “Blogging and the 1st Amendment Panel Discussion at Marshall University”

  1. Luke Gilman says:
    September 23, 2009 at 9:13 pm

    The Marshall student newspaper carries a synopsis of the discussion here: Kerissa Bennett, The Parthenon, Talking about the future: Panel discusses bloggers and the First Amendment (Sept. 23, 2009)

  2. Luke Gilman says:
    September 25, 2009 at 11:32 am

    Lawrence Smith, Panel: Blogs, help, don’t hinder First Amendment, The West Virginia Record (Sept. 24, 2009).

    Kevin Qualls, a professor of journalism at Murray State University in Kentucky, qualified his answer to say that not all bloggers are in the news-gathering business. He said some blog as a hobby or for public relations purposes.

    However, he said, they are no less deserving of First Amendment protection should the issue arise.

    What has probably got blogging somewhat of a bum rap, the panelist said, is the anonymous person blogging from his basement that’s printing potentially libelous information. Howard J. Bashman, an appellate attorney from Philadelphia, who publishes a blog called How Appealing, said a blogger faces the same liability issues any other journalist.

    Both he and Qualls said where federal courts may start to speak on the issue is the standard by which an internet service provider must divulge the blogger’s identity if served with a subpoena. Because different states have different standards, it leads to potential litigants to forum shop.

    Dalglish concurred with Qualls and Bashman saying that someone blogging anonymously from the basement of his parent’s home does not give him protection from liability. Conversely, the anonymous blogger has broad latitude in making comments, especially of elected officials. deemed “insulting” that could land him in jail in places like South Africa.

    “Can you imagine being thrown into jail because you said something insulting of a politician?” Dalglish said. “Here, we consider it our duty.”

Leave a Reply

Subscribe without commenting

« Origins General Counsel Sues Former Firm for Defamation, Claims he was used as Shield to Protect CEO and Directors from SEC Investigation »