The sentence against the Cadena Ser shows how some areas of the Internet still do not understand Justice 
As reported by
Cadena Ser ,
"The Magistrate Judge Ricardo Rodriguez Fernandez, head of the Criminal Court No. 16 in Madrid, has issued a statement in which it condemned the Director of SER , Daniel Anido, and the Director of News of the chain, Rodolfo Irago, as perpetrators of a crime of "revealing secrets" to a year and nine months in prison and penalties of "disqualification especially for the management of media and the exercise of the activity of journalists "and" disqualification for the right to stand "for the duration of the custodial sentence imposed." thing that worries me about the statement is that, if accurate as the published media, should be on the same the following:
"protecting the constitutional right to information concerning the media media-television, radio or print media, but must be qualified, the Internet, there is a social media sense, but universal ".
If the reasoning of the decision, for example, had been the complex distinction between two fundamental constitutional principles such as the freedom of expression and information and the privacy and right to self-image, albeit arguable, would be in the complex boundary between two basic rights: freedom of information and right to privacy.
In the new era of "Internet" where everyone becomes an "editor" and liable to be covered in a breach of privacy, we have to get used to achieve a basic balance between these two fundamental rights of individuals; none of them is an absolute value and the collision between them, sometimes it is served.
Post, for example, images "vindictive" of who was the partner, friend, etc., is clearly not informative and falls within the field, obviously, invasion of privacy. The problem arises when freedom of information, which may be relevant, it conflicts with certain aspects of the right to privacy, hence the definition is not so clear.
But the judge, as derived from published information, drift into a more complex in the sense that the Internet "is not a means of social communication, but universal," meaning that if the same information would have appeared, eg , in The Journal printed edicición Country had entered into the field of "social media", but the same information in different media (which is the common medium of all media), such as the Internet, then it is outside the scope to address issues more newspaper under the umbrella of freedom of information.
If the conviction is for revealing secrets, contained in Article 197 of the
ORGANIC LAW 10/1995 of 23 November Penal Code, regardless of "support" of the medium to publish it (either an edit printed paper or Internet), the debate would be different, the fuzzy boundary where the right end freedom of information and protection of privacy. But apparently, this is not the case, has been mainly on the support that has supported the publication of the final element to convict journalists. There
convictions and, in the delimitation of the two constitutional rights such as the freedom of information and protection of the right to privacy, when one considers that the publication of a certain data is not essential for the sensitivity of the information provided But here, it seems, the debate is another, is the exclusion of the Internet as a means of communication when it really is, and this worries me especially.
If also the list of members of the PP was false and thus was relevant to demonstrate, how these journalists could test the object of their information when the online edition of the Cadena Ser another instrument or tool, the Cadena own?.
It is unthinkable that in the broadcast through the radio the city can retain the full list of alleged irregular PP affiliations. I understand what journalists want to do is prove the veracity of information published and it appears that this fact was proved by using the Internet as the medium most appropriate for this policy-relevant information. Moreover the complaint affiliations of the alleged irregular performed Cadena SER picked up the complaints of the former president of the PP in Villaviciosa de Odon (Madrid) and warnings in several letters to the then general secretary of the regional PP, Ricardo Romero de Tejada, of the existence of 78 affiliations allegedly irregular, all related to two constructors madrileños.La SER radio delivered the news and published on its website.
field in the turbulent boundary between freedom of information (especially as in this case that he moved a public interest in demonstrating that allegedly were illegal and could be relevant to the urban influence) has been establishing a more flexible definition for people who are dedicated to the public from others who do not have a public commitment, in this case, it seems, was unlawful affiliation of these people falls clearly in the possible political impact of the decisions had to take in that territory, likely playing the urban area. We were faced with a draft political decision, with clear implications depending on who wins the battle of the affiliations.
If we understand the Internet as a "network of networks" universal reporting and communicating to people through their computers or other means, where it also interacts would be facing the ultimate media.
Already on December 6, 2009 with
another topic, arguing on the importance of Internet in times of privacy protection , no doubt, especially if what is published is not relevant to prove the fact exposed, the generalization that the Internet brings in information processing.
Now everyone can be "publishers" of information on the Internet. It is perhaps the judge who issued the sentence has not Entente in its argument. Internet is the medium par excellence, is the media where a universal we are all editors and freedom are wide, also our due respect privacy, but in this case, in my humble opinion, the journalists were forced to publish the list of alleged false affiliations and without the publication of the list, Deny by PP would not have had credit information.
surprising that the PP, in the words of Minister of Health of the Community of Madrid, Guemes, be glad of the conviction and refer the concept of "truth" because it appears from the same sentence, it is judged veracity of published (and that is true) if the concept of privacy and freedom, which is bounded seems more of a media if it is Internet.
As I hope the statement is actionable recourse and win, both for the work of the two journalists to defend the truth of what is published, for the concept of freedom of information online, which should should have exactly the same protection any media, because the Internet is a universal media, yes, but media, which in addition, everyone can edit.
