1) The words 'periodic' and 'publication' are so inclusionary as to be essentially meaningless, and while it is a precise definition, it is so broadly accepting that it is essentially useless in providing intent or guidance.
2) The phrase 'periodic publication' isn't one that has a meaningful relationship to the profession of journalism, and the lack of provided definition of relevance leaves the clause to be too vague to provide any useful intent or guidance.
I think we're in agreement here, the clause is poorly written.
Re: The law and why people are ticked...
1) The words 'periodic' and 'publication' are so inclusionary as to be essentially meaningless, and while it is a precise definition, it is so broadly accepting that it is essentially useless in providing intent or guidance.
2) The phrase 'periodic publication' isn't one that has a meaningful relationship to the profession of journalism, and the lack of provided definition of relevance leaves the clause to be too vague to provide any useful intent or guidance.
I think we're in agreement here, the clause is poorly written.