Nieman Foundation at Harvard
HOME
          
LATEST STORY
Not a revolution (yet): Data journalism hasn’t changed that much in 4 years, a new paper finds
ABOUT                    SUBSCRIBE
April 29, 2012, 12:30 a.m.
Audience & Social
LINK: arstechnica.com  ➚   |   Posted by: Joshua Benton   |   April 29, 2012

Ars Technica’s Venkat Balasubramani and Eric Goldman note the case of Bland v. Roberts, where three sheriff’s department workers argue they were fired because they had “liked” the Facebook page of their boss’ electoral opponent. The court says a Facebook like does not qualify as protected First Amendment speech:

It is the court’s conclusion that merely “liking” a Facebook page is insufficient speech to merit constitutional protection. In cases where courts have found that constitutional speech protections extended to Facebook posts, actual statements existed within the record.

First Amendment jurisprudence, of course, has held that many non-verbal, non-written acts qualify for protected status (memorably flag burning).

Show tags Show comments / Leave a comment
 
Join the 45,000 who get the freshest future-of-journalism news in our daily email.
Not a revolution (yet): Data journalism hasn’t changed that much in 4 years, a new paper finds
“Our findings challenge the widespread notion that [data-driven journalism] ‘revolutionizes’ journalism.”
One of India’s most famous newspapermen is turning to digital with a political journalism platform
Shekhar Gupta said he named his new venture The Print to signal to readers that its standards would be high: “We feel there is a belief that once you go digital, the bar is lowered.”
The New York Times released new staff social media guidelines, so phew, thankfully that’s settled
“In social media posts, our journalists must not express partisan opinions, promote political views, endorse candidates, make offensive comments or do anything else that undercuts The Times’s journalistic reputation.”