June 7th, 2009 
Journo If you run a NASCAR Web site, now might be your chance. NASCAR announced last week the creation of the “NASCAR Citizen Journalists Media Corps” meant to bring together the “top-independent NASCAR-related websites.”
The release from NASCAR acknowledged the changing media landscape.
“As the newspaper industry adjusts to a new age of information, NASCAR fans and former traditional media have taken it upon themselves to report, cover and opine on the sport. Today there are thousands of NASCAR related websites. Many of these sites cover the sport on a daily basis and offer unique and fresh perspectives to a large audience.”
The release said the new crop of “citizen journalists” will be selected as part of a review process that will include: “professionalism, reporting and commentary, use of social networking tools. ” It said the initial list will be announced in the coming weeks.
Along with access to press credentials and all that goes along with that the “citizen journalists” will have the opportunity to have their work published on NASCAR.com and they will be allowed access to (from what I can tell from the release) the NASCAR Media site which among other things features news releases, statistics, audio, video and photos. One of the cooler things they started doing too was live-feeding press conferences held at the track media centers; this is very helpful to those who can’t be at the track every weekend.
All the above being said, the plans for this aren’t exactly clear, so it will be interesting to see how they go about things in the coming weeks. One big question I have is what is the benefit of press credentials if you can’t regularly be at the track? I don’t know of too many bloggers, or independent Web site operators who can afford to fly all over hell and gone to go to races.
I though, have to applaud NASCAR for recognizing the power and influence of these “community journalists.” The internet has become a very powerful tool and anything they can do to engage their audience is going to be a plus.
A couple of months ago I wrote about some of the things teams, more specifically Earnhardt Ganassi Racing, were doing to embrace social media (essentially EGR was targeting the same people NASCAR is now targeting). EGR offered increased access to the team through things like conference calls and the like. I thought it was a great idea at the time, but it appears EGR’s idea petered out (I don’t know if anything was ever done with this). It’s a shame they missed out on an opportunity to be at the forefront of the changing media in the sport.
Back to NASCAR though, I hope their efforts don’t meet the same fate. NASCAR has a great opportunity to embrace this very powerful medium.
It will be interesting to see in the coming weeks who they select and how this changes the media landscape in the sport.
So now I want to throw it to you (our friend JD over at the Daly Planet took this topic up last week and it was interesting to see what his readers had to say about it). Are you skeptical of this? Do you hope you are among those chosen? Tell us what you think!
Posted in 
Tags: 
I mentioned this briefly in an older post but I’ll be very curious to see how libel laws come into play for bloggers. Like ‘em or not, tradtional journalists have been trained to substantiate facts; I’d guess the average blogger (Journo excluded of course!!) doesn’t have the slightest idea of what could happen if they start an Internet rumor that defames someone.
“Are you skeptical of this?”
You bet, just more fluff.
“citizen journalists” will be selected as part of a review process that will include: “professionalism, reporting and commentary, use of social networking tools. ”
Sounds good, but likely just more “screened, filtered & qualified” fluff.
Hope I’m wrong.
This would work very well if one of the websites actually banned together fans from all over the country who attend races, give that person the press credential to represent your website at that race and report in what they see and hear at the track that week.
For instance, I go to the Michigan races every year but can’t afford to travel consistently to any other tracks right now so I could be the MIS representative. Meanwhile a fan with a similar situation in Phoenix, Texas, Atlanta, etc could become the representative for those tracks for the site.
Have your website create a criteria that each representative must follow. i.e. what meetings to go too, what stories to check on while also leaving enough wiggle room for each person to put their own unique style on race reporting.
I’ve never understood why no site hasn’t already done this but it’s waiting to be done and would give a site great value by having a representative at the track every week.
Ross – why would you think NASCAR would select someone without a long enough history to research and with demonstrated ability to produce professional articles?
As far as defaming someone or being guilty of libel, it’s possible but not likely.
Individuals whether they be a NASCAR star or other “public” figure are in effect exempt from the libel laws. If the plaintiff is a public figure, “he or she must also prove actual malice,” something in most cases is a very hard thing to do.
Defamation, libel and copyright issues are all covered by the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), a non-profit organization, and they specifically address issues involved with blogging or other types of internet publications.
Marc: I agree that NASCAR will pull the cream of the crop for its project and monitor it like the Kremlin. I was speaking more of bloggers in general. We’ve already seen a few lawsuits and while they may be thrown out, it’s a bitch to have to defend.
Public figures are not exempt, just require higher proof of intent to malice. That said, the Web spreads information like a wildfire and can do damage in minutes. I’m just curious how the laws will affect new media.
P.S.:
Just ask The National Enquirer and Star about public figures being exempt from libel laws.
Ross- You make an interesting point. Quite some time ago I heard the counsel for a major newspaper chain speak on a similar thing. A lot of the discussion was, with all this new technology, what makes a person a journalist and what point are they protected from prosecution on certain things, like revealing a confidential source. Obviously operating a blog does not automatically meet the threshold, but what does? No good answer was established. The fact of the matter is bloggers (us included) are not immune from libel lawsuits. The unfortunate thing is, not too many people have much experience with media law.
Marc- While it is true there is a higher threshold, public figures do sometimes win libel suits. I wouldn’t want to have to pay a lawyer $300 an hour to defend me either.
Journo,
Ya’ll’s website is probably right on the cusp of what NASCAR’s considering.
You might just qualify for a cold pass. Sweeeet . . .
- RA Eckart -
You gotta be careful with this. Those papers you sign contain a clause (Article 4, I’m told) that allows NASCAR to pull those credentials if you don’t walk the line. This is NASCAR’s attempt to reduce the bad press being issued against them. So, go ahead, but be sure to check your angst at the door. NASCAR is watching.
Steve: I like your idea. I am a huge Dover fan and make at least one race weekend there per year (if not both). I would jump at the opportunity to cover that track.
Mïk, you were “told” by someone about some alleged clause?
Please, if you believe that you’ve obviously never read anything from the late David Poole, Ed Hinton and a couple other NASCAR beat writers that continually show disdain for some NASCAR policies or actions in the most vociferous way.
The good Lord pulled Poole’s credentials, the rest still possess theirs.
Ross and Journo… Never said public figures WERE exempt and clearly said “in effect” they were.
A public figure must show “actual malice” that you published with either knowledge of falsity or in reckless disregard for the truth.
To quote the EFF – “Bloggers have freedom from liability for hosting speech the same way other web hosts do. We’re working to strengthen Section 230 liability protections under the Communications Decency Act (CDA) while spreading the word that bloggers are entitled to them. (See Barrett v. Rosenthal.)”
And yes, before you ask, I’m a member of the EFF.
I will also add, NASCAR gave me access to everything they are offering in this program with the exception of the race day credentials two years ago. (Have never asked for them)
And frankly I’m living proof of the organization not trying to stifle or sensor anything I write as I’ve been very critical of them over that time and will continue to be.
Article 4 says that you can only say, photograph, or report what is approved by NASCAR. Ed Hinton, David Poole, and the few other non-Kool Aid drinkers were established long before NASCAR began enforcing Article 4. There was an interesting little thing called Credential-gate in which a lot of newspaper journalists refused to sign the form until Bill France Jr. backed off on Article 4 and issued the journalists their credentials. Article 4 is still there and it’s still alive and well and being enforced. Ask Monte Dutton about the letter he got from BZ France.
marc: The case you cited protects bloggers from libel actions against them resulting from comments by users (“us”) on their blog. It does not protect bloggers from their own posts. A plaintiff can still recover damages from the “source of the statement.” If that source is a blog, then a blogger can still be sued.
While difficult to recover damages in a public figure libel suit, a blogger’s life can certainly be made more difficult & expensive then it needs to be. I think Ross & Journo make valid points regarding potential libel actions since cyberlaw is such a new area of law. Maybe it will be determined that the “actual malice” standard is too high a threshold considering the ease of access the world has to the damaging content in a blog. We don’t know yet.
Mike – I vaguely remember credential-gate. I think it was 2000ish. I seem to recall it being somewhat about NASCAR approval, but also what NASCAR owned and did not own. There was a big push that basically NASCAR owns all media rights to anything/everything that happens within NASCAR controlled real estate during a race event. That was hitting the photo/video guys more than the writers.
windowlicker – No that’s how you misinterpret the section cited. (i.e. ““Bloggers have freedom from liability for hosting speech the same way other web hosts do.”)
To think a commentor would be protected and not a blog author makes no logical or legal sense.
Section 230 of Title 47 of the United States Code (47 USC § 230) provides the following protections:
“Your readers’ comments, entries written by guest bloggers, tips sent by email, and information provided to you through an RSS feed would all likely be considered information provided by another content provider. This would mean that you would not be held liable for defamatory statements contained in it. However, if you selected the third-party information yourself, no court has ruled whether this information would be considered “provided” to you. One court has limited Section 230 immunity to situations in which the originator “furnished it to the provider or user under circumstances in which a reasonable person…would conclude that the information was provided for publication on the Internet….”
Frankly, this entire discussion is academic.
NASCAR has said they will select specific articles from the selected blog authors for publication on their main website.
To think they would post an article that defames an individual or in any way subjects themselves to legal action is close to Black Helicopter territory. The chances of it happening are slim to none.
P.S Mike in Floyd Va I believe knobcreekfan is much closer to the truth on the noted incident, it was over photogs and the like not beat writers.
As for contacting Dutton, as I have a reasonably close relationship with him I’ll contact him and get the backstory.
The race for the chase has been anyone in the top 12 (the top 10 when it started) and anyone within 400 points of the leader. What happened to anyone within 400 points of the leader? A few races ago there was 15 drivers within 400 points of the leader, now there is 13 drivers and several sitting on the edge looking in.
marc – “To think a commentor would be protected and not a blog author makes no logical or legal sense.”
I think you may be misinterpreting Section 230 (c). I understand it that it provides protection to you as the author of the blog for any defamatory comments that a commentor makes.
For example, if I went to your site and commented on an article and made all sorts of defamatory comments with intent of malice (all sorts of bad stuff that would certainly clear any high standards test for liability), the “victim” of my comments could not hold you liable. It does not mean that they could not sue me, it just means they could not sue you.
One court case involving roommates.com says, “[t]he message to website operators is clear: If you don’t encourage illegal content, or design your website to require users to input illegal content, you will be immune.”
Further, Section 230 provides you protection from me if you decided to pull my defamatory comments. I could not sue you for restricting any of my free speech rights…regardless of the fact if I truly had the right to say what I said or not, I could not hold you liable.
It is also interesting the Section 230(e) states that Section 230 does not effect any other federal laws or state laws. So, no, I do not think Section 230 provides protection for defamatory comments to anyone, author or commentor.
Now, I could be misinterpreting Ross’ original post, but I think he was not referring to liability on NASCAR.com’s part for any comments they may post or link to. As I agree with you, NASCAR.com will not intentionally post anything that would be defamatory. But more that now the untrained blogger will have the same (or much the same) access to people, places and information as traditional media members. And since they are largely untrained in the normal rules of journalism, they would be more likely to break those rules. When they break those rules, will they be held to the same laws/liabilities as traditional media?
Marc: No, I have not misinterpreted anything. The case simply held that bloggers can not be held liable for material contained in a comment to in a blog. This is protection for the blogger.
“To think a commentor would be protected and not a blog author makes no logical or legal sense.”
I did not say a commenter would be protected and a blog author would not. I do not know where you came up with this. My point is that bloggers may still be held liable for material they write but not for other content. Thus “source of the statement.”
Whether you think a libel suit will be successful or is irrelevant. You do not know, because as I said, the area of cyberlaw is so new and blogs are a unique media.
“To think they would post an article that defames an individual or in any way subjects themselves to legal action is close to Black Helicopter territory. The chances of it happening are slim to none.”
I was not discussing what NASCAR chooses to post on their main website because frankly, the majority of articles on NASCAR.com suck and I’m sure the blogs they choose to post will suck as well.
My simple point is that bloggers are susceptible to libel suits for material they write and we do not know yet whether libel cases against bloggers will be successful or not.
knobcreekfan: We are on the same page. Thank you.
Thank you knobcreekfan. That’s exactly what I was saying.
I guess I’m just a typical dumb guy who can’t express himself properly.
(BTW…I’m a she.)
Ross – You just need to write more long winded posts like mine!
Sorry about the “he” thing. But, since I know I will likely call you a “he” at some point in the future, I apologize in advance.
knobcreekfan, I misinterpret nothing, and secondly I along with many blog authors wouldn’t allow the type of comment you describe as it would be sent to spam hell shortly after being posted.
And BTW, in all likelihood never would have seen the light of day as it would have been straight to the moderation cue waiting for approval by the blog auther.
Reread this section of a quote I posted: ““Bloggers have freedom from liability for hosting speech the same way other web hosts do.
You, windowlicker and Ross, have overlooked the importance of the word “hosting.”
As a blog author and owner of a website via a paid-for domain “host” not only the speech of each commenter that visits but my own speech as written in each individual post.
That said, I fully admit the internet and how the law is applied to it is still evolving, at the same time at this point in time damn few bloggers have been held accountable for “speech” whether by the author or a commenter.
knobcreekfan you end by declaring NASCAR might possibly print something from an “untrained blogger.”
You can dive down that rabbit hole as many times as you feel comfortable but that is NOT going to happen – period.
Not to mention all of you are expanding the discussion FAR beyond the specific topic of the thread, NASCAR’s Citizen Journalist program.
For ref here is a list of court cases for “Criminal Libel” and cases involving blog comments.
Mike in Floyd Va, as promised I contacted Monte Dutton on the so-called “credentail-gate” issue you referanced.
To quote Monte: “A huge furor rose, newspaper management, press associations, got involved and they backed down.”
“They” of course is NASCAR.
It seems you cited a non-issue.
marc – First, it certainly appears you are missing the point.
If I offended you by implying that it was even remotely possible that any such comment would ever get through your rock solid moderation, I apologize. However, as TC said in a different discussion, “When actual people are involved, nothing is ever going to be perfect.” It is POSSIBLE (however remote) that a comment will slip through the cracks.
I think it is important to note that Section 230 does not apply simply to defamation, libel, etc. It is very open ended as to the immunity provided. The case with roommates.com was surrounding discriminatory comments made in violation of the Fair Housing Act.
However, to avoid making my example about your site, let’s pretend I posted that same comment on the fake website http://www.defamationofcharacter.com. Same really bad comment. Same intent of malice. Etc.. If that site did not encourage illegal content or require users to input illegal content, that site will be immune. I stand by my example.
The beauty of Section 230(c) (titled “Protection for “good samaritan” blocking and screening of offensive material”) is that regardless of how strong the moderation controls may/may not be, if a comment just happened to slip through the cracks, the webmaster/author of that site would be immune from civil liability with respect to the victim of the comment. Further, if the commenter felt their post was wrongly filtered, removed, etc., the webmaster is again immune from civil liability with respect to the author of the content that was removed.
Second, with all due respect to EFF, EFF is not a legal authority. They are, in essence, a lobbying group. As their website says, they “confront cutting-edge issues defending free speech, privacy, innovation, and consumer rights…” You have quoted a lobbying group’s legal opinion. Their legal opinion is just that, an opinion. As you said in another discussion, “P.S. What I’m supposed to be impressed by others that your link to and agree with you? Everyone has an opinion, and has a right to that opinion.” If you want to defend your position, please cite the law or applicable court cases not someone else’s opinion.
“You, windowlicker and Ross, have overlooked the importance of the word “hosting.” As a blog author and owner of a website via a paid-for domain “host” not only the speech of each commenter that visits but my own speech as written in each individual post.”
Section 230 never uses the word “hosting.” Please explain the importance of the word “hosting” and how that definition would change my interpretation of the immunity granted to the webmaster/author for comments/content generated by others. The second sentence makes no sense.
“knobcreekfan you end by declaring NASCAR might possibly print something from an “untrained blogger.” You can dive down that rabbit hole as many times as you feel comfortable but that is NOT going to happen – period.”
marc – please re-read what I said and stick to that. I said they “will not intentionally post anything that would be defamatory.” As I quote TC earlier, “When actual people are involved, nothing is ever going to be perfect.” They will not intentionally post anything bad, but mistakes happen. There are corrections made in newspapers, magazines, websites every day. Again, they would be immune from civil liability if such a comment happened to slip through though.
I never said they might post from an “untrained blogger.” I think/hope they will posts LOTS of content from the untrained bloggers. Isn’t posting/linking to blogs/content from the untrained blogger the whole idea of the “NASCAR Citizen Journalists Media Corps?”
“Not to mention all of you are expanding the discussion FAR beyond the specific topic of the thread, NASCAR’s Citizen Journalist program.”
Sorry if this discussion went in a direction you did not feel appropriate. However, 1) you did not have to participate, 2) in your post (#4) to Ross and her query of how libel laws will apply to bloggers, you were the second person to comment on the legal aspects. That was your first post of several that furthered the debate about legal issues, 3) discussions (in person or via cyberspace) take twists and turns. This one happened to go down this path and 4) if TC & Journo as moderators felt the conversation was inappropriate for the topic, they could have stopped it. I have not been around this site long, but I like the fact that TC & Journo allow a pretty free flow of discussion.
I think knobcreekfan now holds the record for the longest blog comment ever recorded here at TNI…
Yeah! What knobcreekfan said.
Yeah really, T.C.: I hope they don’t charge you by the word!
Knobcreekfan: You must have gone through a whole bottle of Knob Creek typing that one!
Licker: “What knobcreekfan said” shows how awesome a lawyer you are.
OK, now I’m done.
–Mr. Ross
TC and Ross agreed and in all those words nothing is said that hasn’t been said by myself or others in the thread.
knobcreekfan, you cite one comment of mine, next time you do that read it first.
If you had you would have noted I said any potential lawsuit was “highly” unlikely, AND that the EFF was a non-profit, something you seem to believe I didn’t know.
As for a “direction you [me] did not feel appropriate,” don’t put words into my mouth unless you can find the phrase where I did say it.
Lotsa luck with that
windowlicker made the decision to drag the topic outside the context of the post, I answered him/her. And as you say, “discussions (in person or via cyberspace) take twists and turns.”
Live with it.
And OH what a shock windowlicker agrees with your last post. Not surprising after completely debunking his nonsense about “credential-gate” by contacting someone intimately involved.
Don’t believe/accept it, I’ll forward the Monte Dutton email to you.
And finally, you don’t like or accept the EFF as a legal authority because they are OMG… a non-profit fine, the Media Bloggers Association is a legal authority an offer pro-bono service to those that need it.
I’m also member of that fine organization ($25 per year) and would cite their legal opinions on the matter but doubt it would “ever get through YOUR rock solid moderation,” to plagiarize you.
marc: “And OH what a shock windowlicker agrees with your last post. Not surprising after completely debunking his nonsense about “credential-gate” by contacting someone intimately involved.”
That was not me discussing credential gate, that was Mike in Floyd Va. When accusing me of nonsense, kindly make certain that I am the one being nonsensical. You could open yourself up to a libel suit…
windowlicker – not to mention…
per Mike in VA – “There was an interesting little thing called Credential-gate in which a lot of newspaper journalists refused to sign the form until Bill France Jr. backed off on Article 4 and issued the journalists their credentials.”
Per Monte Dutton via marc – “A huge furor rose, newspaper management, press associations, got involved and they backed down.”
Per marc – “It seems you cited a non-issue.”
For someone not intimately involved, I would say Mike’s version of the situation is pretty similar to Monte’s.
huge furor = interesting little thing
newspaper management/press associations got involved = newspaper journalists refused to sign the form
they backed down = Bill France Jr. backed off
And I don’t know about you, but when I hear “huge furor” and “management got involved,” “non-issue” does not come to mind.
marc – still waiting to hear the importance of the word “hosting” and how it changes how Ross, windowlicker and I interpret the section.
As Mr Ross says…”OK, now I’m done.”
Has anyone seen anymore information about how to become one of the potential reporters? I read that “The initial list of Citizen Journalists will be formally announced in the coming weeks.” But no where in the article did I see how to become a nominee, or how those who are nominated will be chosen.
I’d be extremely interested in an opportunity such as this as I blog about NASCAR 2-3 times a week. I have a small group of followers, but as a female who is interested in any kind of sports journalism I think that any chance we can get to get the proverbial foot in the door is something we should welcome and be appreciative of no matter how much of a “trick” some may see it to be.
Stephanie – They will be looking at authors blogs and other online sources and make a determination from what has been written by them.
Question: If you have a blog why don’t you link to it when commenting here or other places?
Frankly, it’s a strange practice. Link young lady, LINK.
It’s a proactive way to get known and adds to your Google scores as people get to know your blog and link to it.
Thanks for the reply. I would have had my link in there, but when writing from the cell its been hit or miss for posting links of any kind. Luckily I am back to my trusty iBook today and can post it.
My concern is less on the libel issues facing the bloggers and more of exaclty who/how NASCAR is selecting these ‘citizen journalists.’
I’ve read numerous places that the popularity of the site plays into this consideration, but I know (and I’m sure you all know) of certain blogs that are popular that are more or less of a disaster-in-the making for NASCAR if their authors are chosen.
On the other hand,
I think that there’s great posibilities for both NASCAR and bloggers alike IF all goes as planned. And I for one love the idea of the access being regionally, especially in this time when travel is such an expense, and so many bloggers being independent.
Oh well, I guess we’ll see what happens together.