A journalist doesn't need consent to copy and paste what we write here. It's part of freedom of press. If they would have to get consent from everyone who speaks publicly there would be no free press possible. Same with photos. Anyone can take your photo in the public and publish it, regardless if you give consent or not. The only restriction is when it comes to commercial use. The fact that journalists also make a living doesn't make it commercial use. So all these disclaimers are not legally binding. The government makes the laws, no one else. The fact that someone says "you can't do this or that unless I give consent" is meaningless if the law says otherwise.
These statements do not align with US law on several points:
1) Freedom of the press does not override US copyright law. "Fair Use" may (and I repeat
may) allow publication of excerpts or analysis. This is a long complex subject... but one thing is perfectly clear: "press" does not in any way override copyright.
2) The only requirement for an author to copyright written material is to create it in fixed form (paper or computer or...). No other form of registration is required by US law to establish copyright; it exists from the moment the work is "fixed in tangible form", including machine readable. Details
here (US Goverment copyright site).
3) The photo metaphor is even more misleading. Copyright for photographs, by US law, resides with
the photographer. The photographer has total control over whether someone else, including a journalist, can publish the photo. The parallel given "...anyone can take your photo...", is more along the lines of a posting author here mentioning someone else's proper name in a post. The posting author still retains copyright, no matter who is "in" the photo or post.
4) TMC is not "Public". It is privately owned, and makes content available through certain channels of distribution (at present, this forum), and is therefore legally considered a "publication" in its own right. This has even further effect in invalidating the examples given.
IANAL and I can't fully lock down what is and is not permitted by a "journalist" vs. what exact phrasing of limitations in a signature protects. Nonetheless, I can definitively state that "press" does not "override" other protections.
Source: I am a published professional photographer, published professional writer, and have been employed as a magazine editor in the past.