I'm not a lawyer, but I do know this: we need to protect our ability to tell controversial stories.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
An attack upon our ability to tell stories is not just censorship - it is a crime against our nature as human beings.
I don't shy from controversy. I'm telling stories, and I'll tell whatever story seems like it wants to be told.
I know a lot of reporters certainly will go to jail to defend confidential sources. Some have even gone to jail for an issue like this. But I can't say that's the norm.
And it's a human need to be told stories. The more we're governed by idiots and have no control over our destinies, the more we need to tell stories to each other about who we are, why we are, where we come from, and what might be possible.
As a writer, my only responsibility is to tell a compelling story.
I mean, in some cases with libel laws, you know, they can write things about people who have no course of action, because they can't afford to take legal action against them.
Stories are different every time you tell them - they allow so many possible narratives.
Even though writing articles relies completely on truth, you still must tell an interesting story. You can't worry about people knowing who you are and whether or not they want to read your stories.
By telling stories, you objectify your own experience. You separate it from yourself. You pin down certain truths.
They may well say not only is this not true, but I will put in an injunction to prevent publication. No, stories don't go in unless I'm convinced by the people who write them that they're true. And if I'm wrong, then so be it.