Joshua Rozenberg in der Telegraph beschreibt sein Schreiben als “Journalismus, nicht Bloggen”. Seinen Vertrag hat die Zeitung jetzt beendet, er wird aber nächstens auf der eigenen Website weiterschreiben.
Besonders interessant: Rozenberg erwähnt eine neue Art einstweilige Verfügung in England, die jede Erwähnung ihrer selbst verbietet (siehe letztes Zitat).
Joshua Rozenberg writes of law in 2009.
As already noted, he regards his writing as journalism, not blogging. He writes that blogging is largely opinion and journalism news.
Now to the nitty gritty:
I have had the misfortune to have been the last full-time, legally-qualified legal correspondent employed by both the BBC and The Daily Telegraph. There is now less coverage and analysis of law, politics and other demanding topics in the mainstream media than there was even a decade ago. …
In recent years we have seen the creation of an impressive trade press, chronicling the success or otherwise of lawyers and their practices. But the serious general reader looking for rigorous reporting has had to turn to the internet. As newspapers have shrunk, their on-line coverage has expanded.
Although this may not been immediately obvious to website readers, none of the stories and commentaries I have published on www.telegraph.co.uk/law since September 2008 has appeared in print. This is the last of them: the Telegraph has terminated my contract. But I plan to resume these reports, before long, on my own website — www.rozenberg.net — unless, of course, somebody makes me a better offer in the meantime.
He also refers to a new type of injunction that may not be mentioned. I haven’t yet traced the blogger who did mention it:
And blogging is also a way of by-passing the normal constraints of journalism. For example, it is now possible for the courts to issue an injunction which bans any public reference to its existence. I cannot tell you whether I have ever seen such an injunction — or at least, one that may still be in force — because to do so would be to breach it. But a very well-read blogger has recently done just this. If I were to link to that blogger’s website, I would be at risk of putting the Telegraph in contempt of court and I have no intention of doing this — tempting though it might be to test the law.