HR 1962 is a proposal for a press shield law.
The beef of the bill says that…
In any matter arising under Federal law, a Federal entity may not compel a covered person to provide testimony or produce any document related to information obtained or created by such covered person as part of engaging in journalism, unless a court determines by a preponderance of the evidence, after providing notice and an opportunity to be heard to such covered person…
…is closely involved in an imminent crime or act of terrorism.
OK, so far so good.
Except that the bill serves only to protect the mainstream media – the ones that largely kiss Democrat ass:
The term covered person means a person who, for financial gain or livelihood, is engaged in journalism and includes a supervisor, employer, parent, subsidiary, or affiliate of such covered person.
In other words, institutional media – and, likely, the institutionally-paid alt-media that have been Walz and Nolan’s BFFs, ermuhgerd, I’m writing like Sally Jo Sorenson, oh noes – are covered.
All the rest of us – the ones that actually try to hold government accountable? We’re on our own.
Why do representatives Walz, Nolan and McCollum hate freedom of the (non-Democrat-aligned) press?
They provide client service. Unless you get with the program, you’re not a client.
One may only hope that a test case arise involving the MSM vs. evidence which might exonerate or otherwise support the innocence of an accused such as the “gentle giant” of Ferguson MO.
Please correct if I am wrong since I did not read the actual bill, but in my opinion, the excerpt basically gives MSM a carte blanche to say anything and everything, without any attribution, no matter how inflamatory, baseless in fact, and outright lies, without being held accountable whatsoever to the law.