SCOTUSBlog and Press Credentials
There is an ongoing controversy over whether SCOTUSBlog can get a press credential at the Supreme Court. (For some background, here is Adam Liptak’s column.) The Court defers on these matters to the Senate, and the Senate defers to a group of journalists on the “Standing Committee of Correspondents.” The Committee has denied a new petition from SCOTUSBlog for a credential, and is now considering an appeal.
I want to say that I (and many other people) rely on SCOTUSBlog’s professional coverage of the Court’s work. When the health care cases came down in 2012, SCOTUSBlog got it right while the so-called real journalists (I’m talking to you CNN) got the news wrong. Moreover, I think that in a world of blogs, vesting credentialing in an obscure group of reporters (who are, of course, not from blogs) is highly problematic.
I thought that CoOp readers and others might want to make their views known to the Committee on this question, and thus I thought I’d list their names and affiliations. After all, journalists love transparency.
Kate Hunter–Bloomberg News (Kate_HunterDC) on Twitter
Emily Ethridge–CQ Roll Call (email@example.com)
Siobhan Hughes–The Wall Street Journal (siobhanhughes1) on Twitter
Colby Itkowitz–Washington Post (ColbyItkowitz) on Twitter
Peter Urban–Stephens Media Group (firstname.lastname@example.org)