FEC takes up thorny case of political blogs

Most blog activity — political or otherwise — is carried out by individuals on what would charitably be described as a shoestring budget. But what about the increasing numbers of popular blogs that are using or adopting various structured business models?

Then there is the question of whether the FEC is limited to regulating only paid-for political advertising on blogs. Or is everything that supports or endorses a particular candidate appearing on a blog considered to fall under existing campaign contribution ceilings and, as such, subject to regulation?

To what extent are blogs — as distinct from mainstream media's commercial online entities — protected, being primarily vehicles of individual personal opinion? Does the size of their audience make any difference?

Answering some of these questions requires the FEC effectively to define what a publication is, and, at risk of rubbing at an open sore, ask whether bloggers are "journalists." And if bloggers are journalists, are they entitled to different protections if what they produce is considered "news and opinion" instead of "advocacy."

Should bloggers who are directly paid by candidates — as opposed to, say, merely taking their advertising dollars — be required to disclose these payments or run some kind of disclaimer?

What, in effect, is the difference between a blogger who is paid, directly or indirectly, by a candidate for providing "Internet consulting services," for example, and someone who is actually employed by the campaign?

And how about those who are giving away their services as unpaid volunteers? Or those who are paid by a national party organization rather than by individual candidates?

Furthermore, what about bloggers who represent themselves as being independent private citizens, yet are basically political advocates operating in conjunction with a campaign? In the South Dakota senate race in 2004, for example, when John Thune ousted Democratic leader Tom Daschle, there was a clear impact of apparently independent bloggers who were operating as advocates for Thune without any kind of disclaimer.

The FEC proposals appear to give the majority of individual bloggers a pass, in the same way as forwarding a political message or a link to a candidate's site would not be considered a "contribution." But it could be argued that if the principle reason for Internet activity— be that blogging or, at the other end of the spectrum, mass e-mailing for fundraising purposes— constitutes direct advocacy on behalf of a specific candidate, then there is a case for exploring how that fits into the regulatory structure.

At the same time, simply saying that the genie is effectively out of the bottle and extending existing exemptions for the online world, in an all-bets-are-off approach, is tempting. But that, of course, has implications for other media forms.

As the FEC, which is evenly divided between Democrat and Republican members, said when releasing its proposals, the aim is to "ensure that political committees properly finance and disclose their Internet communications, without impeding individual citizens from using the Internet to speak freely regarding candidates and elections".

It's a delicate balance indeed.

MORE FROM FORBES

Forbes Section Front

NYC tops the list of America’s costliest cities Work fashion tips from Sarah Palin’s stylist The states where women earn the most Rich getting richer? Particularly in Connecticut World's most expensive homes Will Ferrell is Hollywood's most overpaid star Dirtiest vehicles on America’s highways The worlds most powerful people The key to dealing with lousy boss: negotiation IRS rules for medical deductions are sickening Forbes Section Front