ABSTRACT
The court continued by listing an online publisher's journalistic experience, education, and reputation as among the factors courts should consider in such disputes. Judges consistently communicated that who the publisher was, his or her education, professional experience, employment, and other details, was a key consideration in cases involving online messengers' claims for journalistic protections. Despite the absence of such legal guides, the judges still communicated they had certain understandings regarding who qualified as a journalist. The inclusion of such concerns, in multiple cases, communicated an understanding by judges that the press has traditionally served the public by providing information that helps individuals make sense of the world around them. Concern for whether communicators who claims to be a representative of the news media in order to benefit from statutory protections that have historically been associated with traditional journalism go beyond FOIA-related cases.
