« Best April Fool's Day Joke | Main | Apple Remote Desktop 3 released »

Or bits as it were.

Whine, whine, whine, whine, whine. Jason O'Grady hasn't gotten enough press, so he reminds us that "The Big Bad Apple" is coming after him. Boo-hoo, big deal. Jason wants to sound like another Daniel Ellsberg, but he can't manage it, because at the heart of it, he knows his case isn't in the Public Interest. No one's dying, or even getting screwed. Well, except for Jason. But of course, he decided that anything that happened in MacMacLand was the same thing as Love Canal and the Pentagon Papers. Delusional much?

However, since being reasonable would make him look silly, he goes for the big emotional guns of fear and paranoia:

This case is not about me, it's not about Apple and it's not about the technology industry. It's about the First Amendment. If we don't have a free press and protection under the First Amendment large corporations can sue any journalist publishing something that they don't agree with. The last time I checked, this was the United States of America - not communist China - and we are protected by a wonderful document called The Constitution.

In case you hadn't noticed Jason, the First Amendment is not in fact, an absolute right. There are, and always have been restrictions on it, and every time some prat with a blog panders to the "Press is above the law" crowd, you cheapen it. Let me reiterate something that Jason seems to have forgotten...he's not above the law. Neither is Apple. He seems to equate "Freedom of the Press" with "Freedom from ever being questioned in any way shape or form". (This of course is idiocy, but, well, if you've read some of Jason's "journalism" in the past, you'd realize that Jason and idiocy are old, dear friends. In fact, I think Shawn King's said it best on a number of occasions: Jason O'Grady's an idiot. When Shawn's right, he's right.)

See, here's the deal. The First Amendment is working. Was Apple able to summarily get its way? No. Was Jason able to summarily get his way? No. They are, as the writers of the Constitution intended, hashing this out in a court of law.

But the idea that the press is not above being questioned scares Jason dry, as we see from yet more of his emotional pandering:

Imagine if Apple wanted to raid your email in-box then sue you for saying something they didn't like. Something has to be done to protect the press from paranoid corporations bent on controlling the media. This case doesn't affect me, it affects every citizen in the United States

Without a subpoena, they can't do that. To get a subpoena, they have to convince a judge that it's valid. Oh looky, due process of law. In addition, the subpoena can be challenged, should I care enough to do so. Mmm...sweet, sweet, due process of law. But in Jason's world, that should only work one way, as he's fallen victim to the rather inane fantasy that all he has to do is call himself a "journalist", and he's beyond reproach. Bullshit. Every time the freedom of the press is challenged, it's hashed out in court. As it should be. If Jason wins, it won't be because he's beyond reproach, but because he had a better case. If he loses, it won't be because we're about to become a bunch of godless commies and be forced to get our eyes bobbed, but because Apple had a better case.

But to Jason, having to work for your rights, and prove your case is not how things should work. Instead, he should be able to print any damned thing he wants and then hide behind the Constitution. Once again, it's the Constitution, not a "Get Out Of Trouble Free" Card.

Oh yeah, and Jason? Your list of cool people who like you still doesn't make you above reproach or challenge. You want to prove your case? You do it like every other journalist in the same situation. You go to court, and you prove it. You may win, you may lose. But you aren't above the law, and the process applies to you too. So stop whining about it because you felt like you needed more ink, okay?

Technorati Tags: Politics, TEH STOOPUD

Comments