Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
The breadth of this amendment as a means to allow individuals to use their minds, to produce their own ideas, and to make those ideas known to others is the unifying theme of this amendment. Most people at the time of its adoption believed that this amendment guaranteed a broad freedom of conscience. Certainly Thomas Jefferson and James Madison thought so.
When the amendment was written, the written word could only be distributed to others by using a rather expensive invention, the printing press. But note that the amendment also allowed people to speak freely, to assemble and share ideas, and to complain to or seek reforms by the government. In this context, it is not possible to believe that the 1st Amendment was only intended to allow those who distributed their ideas using a printing press to exercise their freedom of conscience. I do not see the People then as thinking that freedom of the press was something that belonged only to someone who had made an investment in a printing press. The core idea of the 1st Amendment was to allow people to use their minds and to share their ideas with others.
No, it seems very clear that the dissemination of an individual's ideas and thoughts by right was to be broadly protected by this amendment. That being the case, the freedom to write down one's ideas and to disseminate them was to be protected from any abridging acts of Congress. Thus, the right of bloggers to write down their ideas and to make them available to others for reading is clearly protected by the 1st Amendment.
With experienced Senators such as Dick Durbin showing such profound ignorance of the 1st Amendment, it is no wonder our government has become such a constant threat to the rights of the individual to life, liberty, property, the ownership of one's own body, mind, and labor, and to the pursuit of personal happiness.
To be sure, there is considerable evidence that Dick Durbin is less ignorant than a man of evil intent. He, like all socialists, is only too happy to mislead the many who are uninformed about their individual rights. Persons asserting their individual rights are necessarily a major problem for the supporters of Big Government and socialism.