Blogs everywhere us the Crystal Cox Case as protection to report the news and speak out; check out the disclaimer on this blog

http://mensrightsofarizona.blogspot.com/2015/10/looking-for-men-and-women-to-appear-on.html

"All Rights Strictly Enforced Under Federal Law!

This blog and all other print publications by this author and the Men's Rights Group of Arizona LLC is a form of journalism and protected freedom of speech as described in case law: 9th Circuit Court of Appeals decision, Obsidian Finance Group LLC and Kevin Padrick v. Crystal Cox 12-35238. All Rights Will Be Strictly Enforced!"

Investigative Blogger Crystal Cox makes HISTORY and set's landmark precedent.

"

Bloggers = Media for First Amendment Libel Law Purposes

by Eugene Volokh on January 17, 2014 1:34 pm in Freedom of Speech

So holds today’s Obsidian Finance Group v. Cox (9th Cir. Jan. 17, 2014) (in which I represented the defendant). To be precise, the Ninth Circuit concludes that all who speak to the public, whether or not they are members of the institutional press, are equally protected by the First Amendment. To quote the court,

The protections of the First Amendment do not turn on whether the defendant was a trained journalist, formally affiliated with traditional news entities, engaged in conflict-of-interest disclosure, went beyond just assembling others’ writings, or tried to get both sides of a story. As the Supreme Court has accurately warned, a First Amendment distinction between the institutional press and other speakers is unworkable: “With the advent of the Internet and the decline of print and broadcast media … the line between the media and others who wish to comment on political and social issues becomes far more blurred.”Citizens United, 558 U.S. at 352. In defamation cases, the public-figure status of a plaintiff and the public importance of the statement at issue — not the identity of the speaker — provide the First Amendment touchstones.

I think that’s right, not just as a matter of First Amendment principle but also as a matter of history and precedent (as I documented at length in Freedom for the Press as an Industry, or for the Press as a Technology? From the Framing to Today, 160 U. Pa. L. Rev. 459 (2012)). The specific legal issue that the Ninth Circuit was confronting in this passage, by the way, is whether all who speak to the public are equally protected by the Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc. rules, which are that"

Source and Full Article

http://volokh.com/2014/01/17/bloggers-media-first-amendment-libel-law-purposes/

Good News for Those need to have a blog to report on important issues of the times. Big Media is bought and paid for. The truth is in BLOGS, news by the people for the people.

"From Rev. Crystal Cox — a whistleblower receives protection from the 9th circuit

Posted on April 24, 2015

Reverend Crystal Cox

Crystal L. Cox, Port Townsend Washington

“On January 17, 2014, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sided with Crystal L. Cox from Eureka, Montana who was sued by for defamation by Kevin Padrick, an attorney and his company – Obsidian Finance Group, LLC. Cox had written posts exposing fraud, corruption, money-laundering and so forth.”

“This ruling should be a clear reminder to misguided attorneys, corporations, developers or those with affluence to cease bullying or intimidating those who report the issues of the day.

Many concerned citizens have no choice but to create their own blogs and websites to level the playing field in this blossoming social media warfare.

The government has its plentiful public relations specialists, paid for by taxpayers. Corporations and special interests have their hired PR consultants. There are hired mercenaries who feel no qualms about spinning the facts. News media can be bought or controlled by big money or shut down.

It’s not uncommon for the public to read articles or watch the TV news only to lament the irregularities or inadequate reporting. Oftentimes, critical issues are shunned or ignored by corporate media because of entwined relationships.

Bloggers with information or have intimate experiences and understanding of issues are critically needed now, more than ever.”

source

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/choon-james/confirmed-bloggers-have-f_b_4657313.html

“The Court stated,  The protections of the First Amendment do not turn on whether the defendant was a trained journalist, formally affiliated with traditional news entities, engaged in conflict-of-interest disclosure, went beyond just assembling others’ writings, or tried to get both sides of a story. As the Supreme Court has accurately warned, a First Amendment distinction between the institutional press and other speakers is unworkable.”

They went on to cite cases in which individual speakers have been granted First Amendment rights, despite not being a part of the established press. For example, the First Amendment rights of authors have often been protected,  regardless of their training, background, or affiliations .

” This is very good news for anyone who has a blog or even a desire to post things in an individual capacity on their social network. 

It could also go a far way for advocacy groups that work unofficially for candidates and their rights to create media alleging things against candidates. It could also have important ramifications for blogging in other lawsuits.

For example, if a blogger is treated as a journalist for the purposes of the First Amendment, they could also be treated as a journalist in a matter like protection of sources.”

Source
http://marygsykes.com/2015/04/24/from-rev-crystal-cox-a-whistleblower-receives-protection-from-the-9th-circuit/

Discussion on Citizen Journalists and the Crystal Cox Case.

"Citizen journalists and bloggers share the same rights as established journalists, according to the Ninth Circuit Court. The ruling came as a result of a defamation suit brought in Oregon against blogger Crystal Cox by the Obsidian Finance Group after she alleged they were guilty of fraud and other crimes. The court has ruled that she has the same first amendment protections as major media outlets, and the court ruled unanimously with three judges siding on Cox’ behalf. We discuss the legal guidelines for journalists being applied to citizens in this Buzzsaw news clip with Tyrel Ventura and Tabetha Wallace. Watch the full episode here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RImf3…"

Source
http://consciouslifenews.com/court-ruling-citizen-journalists-same-first-amendment-protections-major-media-outlets/
However NOTE that Cox did NOT have a Bad Background and in FACT is an Anti-Corruption Blogger who attorneys and Judges painted as to have had been a "bad person".

This "Blogger" did NOT have a Bad Background. The attorneys in the Case created this illusion in mass defamation, it is NOT True.

Yes the Court was used to Push an Agenda. Dig Deep into what that Agenda was?

Law School Question Regarding Obsidian v. Cox

The Question was "In what state did the reporter's privilege law applies to a blogger ( in the case Obsidian Finance Group, LLC v. Cox)?"  There answer was OREGON

However, ponder this deeply folks. You are a blogger, in say Montana. You publish a blog post while living in Colorado. A corporation that is incorporated in the State of Washington and Oregon, sues you and they claim Oregon Law as jurisdiction over you.

You are a blogger whose reach is the entire world. Obsidian v. Cox as a case precedence is used all over the world. Read a case out of New Zealand recently. So I would say that there needs to be a national and international shield law, retraction law and to bring laws regarding media, into the New Media Revolution. 

Regulate Free Speech ? no way.

http://libertyneversleeps.com/brian-williams-just-meme/

Landmark Case, yet bloggers still face persecution

http://www.silha.umn.edu/news/WinterSpring2014/SILHACENTERBloggersFirstAmendmentUniversityofMinnesota.html