Josh Wolf

A cold tinge should be crawling up the spines of both seasoned and novice journalists when thinking about the future of freedom of the press - Josh Wolf a video journalist has been thrown in jail by order of a federal judge for refusing to hand over footage taken during a demonstration that turned violent.

On July 8th 2006 Josh Wolf took footage of a political demonstration, he then edited the tape (as most video journalists do) then sold it to local San Francisco media outlets. This sounds harmless enough right? Not according to federal courts. The federal government subpoenaed Wolf’s unedited footage in order to conduct a federal investigation concerning an assault against and officer and damage done to a police car.

The demonstration was an anti-Bush event, which exploded into a confrontation between the protesters and the police. Wolf's footage shows the altercation as it unfolds yet the federal government seeks the unedited version of Wolf's tape in order to proceed with it's investigation concerning whether or not a federal crime was committed by the protesters. Although the edited version of Wolf's tape shows no damage being done to a police car nor does it depict an assault against an officer the federal government has deemed the unedited version as important to the case. Since the police car was partially paid for with federal money the grand jury deemed it a federal case when Wolf refused to turn over his raw footage.

According to Wolf the federal government resembles more the Spanish Inquisition rather than government for the people by the people. The San Francisco Weekly reported, "Wolf called the investigation an FBI witch hunt of anarchists, pointing out that the FBI Joint Terrorism Task Force has monitored many antiwar groups since 9/11, including Indymedia." Indymedia being an anarchist affiliated media outlet.

In order to keep his video Wolf had to demonstrate that the subpoena was a violation of his rights as a journalist and that it was an unreasonable action taken by the federal government. To further augment his argument against the federal government Wolf cited having been visited by members of the FBI's Joint Terrorism Task Force further more, he pointed to recent infractions taken against suspected anarchist organizations and individuals by the Justice Department. Yet there was little he could prove.

Many (including Wolf's lawyers) have argued the California shield law should be called upon to protect Wolf's rights as a journalist. The shield law, "allows journalists to maintain confidential unpublished information obtained during newsgathering. The law lets journalists cast a wide net in reporting, even though they may end up seeing or hearing actions that are illegal." Wolf's lawyers argued that granting the government widespread power to request unused recordings, would be a violation of the First Amendment rights of free speech. Yet since it is a federal case the California shield law does not apply. Furthermore, the extent in which journalists are protected in federal courts is a grey area, which is why this particular case is worrisome in regards to the precedence it is setting.

Another issue that Wolf’s case brings to the limelight is directly related to the term journalist. Wolf is a "self-pointed-citizen-journalist" – a brand of journalists that seem to be growing in numbers and importance as technology allows for non-traditional journalists to publish, post, tape or snap news. Therefore, the definition of a journalist in the eyes of both state and federal courts is called into question. Is Josh Wolf a journalist? If not then who is?

Whether or not Josh Wolf is some punk kid who should obey the federal court order or whether he’s an American hero is beside the point. His case has brought to light many issues that have till recently been only bubbling at the surface. Our civil liberties are being sacrificed like a lamb on the alter of “the greater good.” But is the federal government the “greater good”? Is our safety as a country clearly being threatened by supposed “domestic terrorists” or in this case anarchists so much so that we need to surrender anything the government wants? I think not.

Thus far the precedence set by Wolf's ordeal is quite alarming since in regards to this case the federal government is attempting to bypass the civil liberties granted to us by the First Amendment. Granting the federal government the power to view all material that was gathered but not published or recorded by a journalist would in effect transform journalists into a sort of task force for the Justice Department essentially ending freedom of the press. Yet despite the injustice of Wolf's current condition his case may also help revamp the traditional and archaic definitions attached to the term journalist.