Categories: OLD Media Moves

Journalism has the right to be wrong

The New York Times has an editorial in Sunday’s newspaper about the failure of the U.S. Supreme Court to hear a First Amendment case with business journalism implications.

The Times editorial states, “Unfortunately, the court missed an opportunity to uphold that principle when it refused to take an important First Amendment case last week.

“In the case, the publisher of a financial newsletter promised a hot stock tip, based on inside information, to people willing to pay $1,000. About 1,200 people agreed to pay, but the tip did not pan out, and the stock failed to soar. The Securities and Exchange Commission sued the publisher for securities fraud, and the lower courts agreed that the publisher, Frank Porter Stansberry and his company, Agora Inc., should be penalized.

“It was the first time the S.E.C. had gone after a publisher who did not have a stake in the stock in question. Normally, the laws against securities fraud are designed to prevent insider trading or manipulation by people who stand to profit through ownership of a stock.

“Mr. Stansberry’s actions might seem unorthodox or even unethical by the standards of most reputable publishers, but that does not make them illegal. The implications of the S.E.C.’s action are potentially profound: newspapers or Web sites promising their paying readers stock information that later turns out to be untrue suddenly leave themselves open to fraud charges. Any financial commentator who passes on bad information in good faith could be sued.”

Read more here.

View Comments

  • This is interesting and scary. Its getting to the point where sharing one's opinion can land you in legal trouble. Surely the reader has to take a certain degree of responsibility for doing his/her own due diligence before making up their own mind on whether or not to buy stocks? Where else will this lead? Will publishers like Mr Stansberry need to start adding a disclaimer to each article they write?

  • Let's get this straight. Stansberry was not convicted because of publishing an opinion but because a Federal judge and an Appellate Court found that he ran a complex, for-profit scam, disseminating information he KNEW TO BE FALSE in order to push up a penny stock, in view of selling more of his $1,000 a pop reports.

    The claim that Stansberry is a journalist is ridiculous... last time I checked journalists tend to procure 2 independent sources for every claim they make. Had he done that, he'd have nothing to sell!

    You could claim Madoff was unjustly persecuted because his falsified reports are protected speech!

    Please read the actual findings of the court (http://cmaeda.com/blogfiles/agora-judgement-memorandum.pdf and http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/081037.P.pdf) before taking Stansberry's lies about government persecution. They are true eye openers!!

    And the look at the price development of NSUMF between June 30 and July 20 2010 to see how he continues to manipulate stock prices...

Recent Posts

Advocate seeks a business reporter in Baton Rouge

The Advocate is looking for a savvy reporter to cover the Baton Rouge business scene…

1 day ago

MLex seeks a reporter in Washington

MLex, a LexisNexis company, is an independent news organization for breaking news and forward-looking analysis…

1 day ago

Austin Biz Journal seeks an economic development reporter

The Austin Business Journal seeks a staff writer to cover economic development in one of…

1 day ago

Forbes journalist in Russia placed under house arrest

A Russian court on Saturday placed Sergei Mingazov, a journalist for the Russian edition of…

1 day ago

Investor’s Business Daily turns 40

Justin Nielsen of Investor's Business Daily writes about the newspaper's 40th anniversary. Nielsen writes, "When the…

1 day ago

Fieseler to cover renewable energy, climate and tech for Politico/E&E News

Clare Fieseler has been hired by Politico and subsidiary E&E News to cover renewable energy,…

1 day ago