Journalists as accurate of fortunetellers, high court rules

Most journalists are well aware that in terms of trustworthiness we rank somewhere below used car dealers, and above politicians.

But now Maryland’s highest court has settled the question, ruling that when it comes to making fraudulent claims, journalists are on a par with fortunetellers and lawyers, reports The Washington Post

“While we recognize that some fortunetellers may make fraudulent statements, just as some lawyers or journalists may, we see nothing in the record to suggest that fortunetelling always involves fraudulent statements,” the Court of Appeals said in a ruling this week, overturning a local ordinance in Montgomery County which had banned the sale of fortunetelling services because of its “inherently fraudulent” nature.

But the court said essentially, (and I’m translating the legalese into plain English here) that even if claims to be able to foretell the future are total BS,  how different is that really from all the BS that comes from news reporters and attorneys?  It’s all protected BS under the First Amendment.

Now, the local law didn’t outlaw fortunetelling, it just tried to protect gullible consumers from actually forking over money for the bogus service, banning “remuneration or gratuity for forecasting or foretelling or for pretending to forecast or foretell the future by cards, palm reading or any other scheme.”

It’s a good thing the court ruled the way it did, or Montgomery County might have been tempted to expand the to require newspapers with “fraudulent statements” to give away their product for free, too.

But the court has upheld the bedrock principle that not only can entrepreneurs create BS, they can charge you for it, too.

Whew.  That was close.

Personally, I can take being compared to fortunetellers, but lawyers?  That’s a low blow.