The First Amendment to the United States Constitution establishes the right to freedom of speech. Based on this amendment, the United States does not require its journalists to be registered or to have a license to practice the profession since it is understood that by this principle of freedom, it must be unregulated work.
But as in everything, there are grays. And the bloggers? Do they count as regular journalists? What happens when political activism is conducted from blogs?
Based on these doubts, the Florida State Legislature, Jason Brodeur (of the Republican Party) introduced a bill which, if approved and signed by Governor Ron DeSantis, This would require bloggers who write about members of the legislative and executive branches to be registered to do this work. The project understands blogs as “web pages that host any blogger and are frequently updated with opinion, commentary, or business content.”
When registering, the blogger must specify whether they receive funds of any kind for writing this content and who grants these funds. Those who are not registered would face a fine of $25 per day for each day the writing was published, up to a maximum of $2,500. The draft says the sanction does not apply to posts in traditional media, even if they are online.
“Employee bloggers are lobbyists (known as PACS in the US) They write instead of speak. Both are professional voters. If lobbyists have to register and report, why not paid bloggers?“Brodeur told the publication. Florida politics.
Florida’s legislative session begins this year on April 10 and will last two months. During this time, these types of projects will be discussed. Those who manage to get approved in both chambers, the Senate and the House of Representatives, will then make their way to the governor’s office. those who sign Ron DeSantis they will become law and come into force on July 1.
It is not known if the governor supports this project, which should cause controversy. Several constitutional experts have already indicated that if it were law, it would probably be challenged in court, where hardly a judge wouldn’t interpret it as opposed to the First Amendment.
Continue reading: