"Media freedom dented" or is it freedom abused

Are we free to denigrate anyone we like and call it our freedom. I think not. No one appreciates being slandered or defamed. It is one thing to portray the king as doing nothing, it is another thing to bring a sexual act with his wife and call it "Freedom of the Press". The article is right in comparing it to the cartoons about Muhamed, and those should have been prosecuted as well.
We now live in a permissive society in which everyone wants there rights, without the responsibilities to go with them. Piled on top of that is a society that believes that there is nothing truly right or wrong as there is no arbitrator.

____________________________________________

Was it lese majeste or just a good laugh? Scurrilous libel or a witty commentary on a topical issue for Spanish parents?
Prince Felipe and Princess Letizia
El Jueves poked ribald fun at the royal couple
A court in Spain has convicted Manel Fontdevila, cartoons editor of the popular satirical weekly magazine El Jueves, and cartoonist "Guillermo" of "damaging the prestige of the crown".
Both men received a hefty 3,000-euro (£2,100) fine.
Their offence was to have published a cartoon last July making ribald fun of the heir to the Spanish throne, and of the government's scheme to encourage women to have more babies by giving mothers a special payment for each new birth.
It was a caricature of Prince Filipe having sex with his wife, Princess Letizia, and telling her: "Do you realise that if you get pregnant, it will be the closest thing to work I've done in my life?"

'More censorship'
The cartoon is funny, but the issue raised by its banning is serious. The episode has worrying echoes of last year's frenzied and violent protests against the cartoons about the Prophet Muhammad printed in European newspapers.
 
Spanish law gives special protection to royals
Those cartoonists faced death threats, a number of people died in disturbances around the world, and the end result was a defeat for freedom of expression.

In the Spanish case, censorship of the magazine has already taken place and will not be reversed. Within hours of the cartoon's appearance Spanish judges ordered the seizure of all copies of that edition of the magazine.
This is only one of a growing number of recent cases of media censorship or self-censorship in Europe that have arisen thanks to restrictive laws or monopolistic patterns of media ownership.

Some, like the Spanish case, involve attempts to prosecute journalists for violating laws that give special protection to the most powerful and privileged figures in public life.

In Romania, a law has just been passed which exposes journalists to the risk of seven years in jail if they publish video footage taken secretly of politicians taking bribes. It follows a case in which film of a government minister accepting a secret cash payment was shown on TV, leading to his resignation.

In France, a newspaper expose written during this year's presidential election campaign, revealing that Cecilia Sarkozy - the then wife of winning candidate Nicolas Sarkozy - failed to cast her vote, was removed on orders from the newspaper's owner, a close associate of the new President.

In Turkey, the infamous Article 301 of the criminal code makes it an offence punishable by jail terms to insult the armed forces or those in positions of high office.

Criminal prosecutions

Turkish officials insist that similar laws protecting the holders of high offices of state also exist in France and other Western countries.

But a Turkish legal expert explained the difference: "It's like the laws in some American states that still ban oral sex between married couples", he said. "They exist on paper but are no longer used!"

In Turkey, hundreds of journalists have been prosecuted under Article 301 and similar laws.

Miklos Haraszti is Europe's chief enforcer of media freedom on the governments and courts of the 56 member states of the OSCE (Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe).

He says that oppressive laws against the media, intimidation and threats of dismissal, are all being used as weapons to censor the work of journalists in Eastern and Western Europe today.

The latest evidence for that harsh verdict comes from a Survey of Media Freedom in 20 European states presented to the OSCE's Representative for Media Freedom last weekend. The study, entitled Goodbye to Freedom?, was published by the independent Association of European Journalists.

'Unusable' laws
It finds that within the past year alone, journalists in 18 out of 20 European countries - including would-be models of democracy like Germany, the Netherlands and France - have faced criminal prosecution, or been jailed for breaking various laws that impede them from reporting on matters of public interest. (The two exceptions were the Czech Republic and the UK.)

Yet each year dozens of judgements made by the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg overturn the convictions of journalists on libel or secrecy charges in national courts.

So is it really time for the media in Europe to say "Goodbye to Freedom"? Miklos Haraszti says simply that European governments must not pass laws, like criminal libel for journalists, which are "unusable".

The prosecution and conviction of the cartoonists who published a funny sketch of a Spanish prince to make their viewers laugh has chipped away a bit more from the fragile pillar of media freedom in Europe.
William Horsley is media freedom representative for the Association of European Journalists.

S.1 SEC. 220 - DISCLOSURE OF PAID EFFORTS TO STIMULATE GRASSROOTS LOBBYING

Call me a pessimist But I really wonder what the reason for wanting to control and have grassroots lobbying efforts register with the House and Senate?

I suspect that this will end up in court and be struck down as breaking the freedom of speech, but its a pretty good try. You have give the democrats credit. They must have been working on these for Years!!!!! the biggest problem that they have is that they wrote this before their were blogs and people getting out information on the Internet. Now while the big organizations are important they are less so and so the democrats have less of an impact.

SEC. 220. DISCLOSURE OF PAID EFFORTS TO STIMULATE GRASSROOTS LOBBYING.

(a) Definitions- Section 3 of the Act (2 U.S.C. 1602) is amended--

(1) in paragraph (7), by adding at the end of the following: `Lobbying activities include paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying, but do not include grassroots lobbying.'; and

(2) by adding at the end of the following:

`(17) GRASSROOTS LOBBYING- The term `grassroots lobbying' means the voluntary efforts of members of the general public to communicate their own views on an issue to Federal officials or to encourage other members of the general public to do the same.

`(18) PAID EFFORTS TO STIMULATE GRASSROOTS LOBBYING-

`(A) IN GENERAL- The term `paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying' means any paid attempt in support of lobbying contacts on behalf of a client to influence the general public or segments thereof to contact one or more covered legislative or executive branch officials (or Congress as a whole) to urge such officials (or Congress) to take specific action with respect to a matter described in section 3(8)(A), except that such term does not include any communications by an entity directed to its members, employees, officers, or shareholders.

`(B) PAID ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE GENERAL PUBLIC OR SEGMENTS THEREOF- The term `paid attempt to influence the general public or segments thereof' does not include an attempt to influence directed at less than 500 members of the general public.

`(C) REGISTRANT- For purposes of this paragraph, a person or entity is a member of a registrant if the person or entity--

`(i) pays dues or makes a contribution of more than a nominal amount to the entity;

`(ii) makes a contribution of more than a nominal amount of time to the entity;

`(iii) is entitled to participate in the governance of the entity;

`(iv) is 1 of a limited number of honorary or life members of the entity; or

`(v) is an employee, officer, director or member of the entity.

`(19) GRASSROOTS LOBBYING FIRM- The term `grassroots lobbying firm' means a person or entity that--

`(A) is retained by 1 or more clients to engage in paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying on behalf of such clients; and

`(B) receives income of, or spends or agrees to spend, an aggregate of $25,000 or more for such efforts in any quarterly period.'.

(b) Registration- Section 4(a) of the Act (2 U.S.C. 1603(a)) is amended--

(1) in the flush matter at the end of paragraph (3)(A), by adding at the end the following: `For purposes of clauses (i) and (ii), the term `lobbying activities' shall not include paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying.'; and

(2) by inserting after paragraph (3) the following:

`(4) FILING BY GRASSROOTS LOBBYING FIRMS- Not later than 45 days after a grassroots lobbying firm first is retained by a client to engage in paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying, such grassroots lobbying firm shall register with the Secretary of the Senate and the Clerk of the House of Representatives.'.

(c) Separate Itemization of Paid Efforts To Stimulate Grassroots Lobbying- Section 5(b) of the Act (2 U.S.C. 1604(b)) is amended--

(1) in paragraph (3), by--

(A) inserting after `total amount of all income' the following: `(including a separate good faith estimate of the total amount of income relating specifically to paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying and, within that amount, a good faith estimate of the total amount specifically relating to paid advertising)'; and

(B) inserting `or a grassroots lobbying firm' after `lobbying firm';

(2) in paragraph (4), by inserting after `total expenses' the following: `(including a good faith estimate of the total amount of expenses relating specifically to paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying and, within that total amount, a good faith estimate of the total amount specifically relating to paid advertising)'; and

(3) by adding at the end the following:

`Subparagraphs (B) and (C) of paragraph (2) shall not apply with respect to reports relating to paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying activities.'.

(d) Good Faith Estimates and De Minimis Rules for Paid Efforts To Stimulate Grassroots Lobbying-

(1) IN GENERAL- Section 5(c) of the Act (2 U.S.C. 1604(c)) is amended to read as follows:

`(c) Estimates of Income or Expenses- For purposes of this section, the following shall apply:

`(1) Estimates of income or expenses shall be made as follows:

`(A) Estimates of amounts in excess of $10,0000 shall be rounded to the nearest $20,000.

`(B) In the event income or expenses do not exceed $10,000, the registrant shall include a statement that income or expenses totaled less than $10,000 for the reporting period.

`(2) Estimates of income or expenses relating specifically to paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying shall be made as follows:

`(A) Estimates of amounts in excess of $25,000 shall be rounded to the nearest $20,000.

`(B) In the event income or expenses do not exceed $25,000, the registrant shall include a statement that income or expenses totaled less than $25,000 for the reporting period.'.

(2) TAX REPORTING- Section 15 of the Act (2 U.S.C. 1610) is amended--

(A) in subsection (a)--

(i) in paragraph (1), by striking `and' after the semicolon;

(ii) in paragraph (2), by striking the period and inserting `; and'; and

(iii) by adding at the end the following:

`(3) in lieu of using the definition of paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying in section 3(18), consider as paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying only those activities that are grassroots expenditures as defined in section 4911(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.'; and

(B) in subsection (b)--

(i) in paragraph (1), by striking `and' after the semicolon;

(ii) in paragraph (2), by striking the period and inserting `; and'; and

(iii) by adding at the end the following:

`(3) in lieu of using the definition of paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying in section 3(18), consider as paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying only those activities that are grassroots expenditures as defined in section 4911(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.