03/02/2020 Slater v Blomfield [2014] NZHC 2221; [2014] 3 NZLR 835 (12 September 2014) support the submission that receiving information for Mr Slater’s blog was not in the normal course of his work. [77] There is no doubt that Mr Slater works for Whale Oil. He owns it and administers it. For the reasons that I have given when considering whether Whale Oil was a news medium, in the course of working for Whale Oil Mr Slater obtained or was given information that he disseminated to the public. [78] In a 3 March 2014 interview, a transcript of which was attached to one of Mr Blomfield’s affidavits, the following exchange is recorded with Mr Slater: Q. How many hours a day do you spend blogging? Do you have a structured work flow or do you just blog when inspiration hits? A. Two to four hours a day actually writing posts. The rest of the day is all work that goes into getting the background material, interviews, meetings and general networking that keeps the information flowing. He does go on to say in the same interview that Whale Oil is his “hobby”. [79] Mr Slater estimated that he published 20 posts on his site each day. What he published in the month of May 2012 was 377 pages of typed script. Mr Slater also commented in an interview attached to Mr Blomfield’s most recent affidavit that it was very difficult for him to run his blog whilst being editor for Truth and he had to rely on volunteers and family to assist him. This is a further indication that he was putting a considerable amount of daily effort into the Whale Oil site. [80] He also says in the interview that he would love Whale Oil to be his career as this would mean that he was making enough money to pay all the bills and pay himself a reasonable salary, but that in the meantime his career was his consulting work and that the blog was the product of passion. His efforts were considerable and regular. I have already concluded that making a profit is not essential for the endeavour to be “in the course of work”. [81] After reading all the affidavits, and considering his publications, my overall impression in terms of his efforts in running Whale Oil is that he worked on it daily, and devoted a number of hours of concentrated work to it each day. I consider he was engaged and active in the publication of news and that at the very least his efforts could be regarded as equivalent to those of a journalist doing significant and regular part-time work for a newspaper or television. Whether those efforts in terms of time and regularity could be equated to an employed journalist for such an organisation is debatable. They are perhaps better compared to those of a freelance journalist. The fact the evidence is that any earnings in early 2012 were modest is not conclusive. [82] The fact that, back in 2012, Mr Slater denied that he was a journalist and was describing the site as a hobby and did not receive remuneration is not determinative. Of more importance than his selfcategorisation is the nature and quality of his journalistic endeavours. Mr Slater was involved in working on the Whale Oil website on a regular daily basis. The work involved significant effort. It is clear from a reading of the articles that they involved investigative work, and this is confirmed by the progression of his business as a blogger in the last two years. While some blog posts contain purely derivative material, Mr Slater has a distinct style that features in many blog posts. [83] I am satisfied that from early 2012 onwards he received information from his informants in the normal course of his work as a journalist for publication in the news medium “Whale Oil”. Therefore s 68(1) www.nzlii.org/nz/cases/NZHC/2014/2221.html 18/30