Jean-Baptiste Soufron wrote:
Unions accreditating journalists will certainly be mad at it (as in France), and it would picture the foundation as a liable editor rather as a not-liable publisher.
This will most certainly be different in different countries, and we should be careful to use the right names and phrases for the simple goals we want to achieve. What I imagine that Wikinews reporters want is a useful way to answer the question "who are you, and who sent you here?" at the door of a press conference. It need not be the press room of the U.S. president or the U.N. general secretary, perhaps only the mayor of Hoboken, N.J.
I can say "I'm Lars Aronsson, only representing myself", but that probably won't open the door for me. It would be a lie to say that "I'm a reporter for Le Monde", so I won't try that either. If I say that "I'm a reporter for the Aronsson Daily", they might never have heard about this newspaper and could want to check with the editors if I'm actually telling the truth.
As the legal officer of Wikimedia Foundation, what do you recommend that the Wikinews reporters say at the door, that will help them get in? What kind of document should they show?
Suppose that I could at least show a business card with my name, the title "volunteer reporter" and the logotype and address of "Aronsson Daily". I think this could help when I say I'm reporting for them. It wouldn't have any "official" status such as the U.K. "press pass", but it would be obvious that only a limited number of people could legitimately carry business cards with this company's logotype. And no newspaper would send two reporters to the same event that didn't know of each other.
Are the proposed "press credentials" of Wikinews anything more than business cards? Obviously they are not a "press pass". What are they really? What are the important differences?