Press-Register — Federal shield law deserving of passage

• By: ASNE staff
• On: 10/16/2007 14:57:21
• In: Shield law editorials

Press-Register, Mobile, Ala.
Oct. 13, 2007

CONGRESS CAN pass a federal shield law that protects journalists and their sources without jeopardizing national security.

The national security threat in this era of terrorism is an argument made by some opponents who wouldn't be able to use journalists so easily to conduct their investigations.

For example, special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald spent a great deal of time and wasted a lot of taxpayers' money persecuting Judith Miller of The New York Times while investigating the leak of a CIA agent's name. Eventually, all he came up with was a dubious perjury charge against Scooter Libby. It isn't surprising that he recently tried to frighten people by suggesting that the Senate version of the shield law would protect terrorists and child pornographers if they claimed to be journalists.

Mr. Fitzgerald's overzealousness actually argues in favor of the shield law he's against. The versions moving through the House and Senate are intended to ensure limited protection for legitimate journalists so that they can report on stories such as Watergate and the Abu Ghraib prison abuses, and so that they can protect sources who risk their jobs or personal safety to ensure that the public learns of wrongdoing.

That's why the legislation is called the "Free Flow of Information Act." The House version could be voted on by the full House as early as Tuesday, while the Senate version has cleared the Judiciary Committee.

The bill's opponents include the Department of Justice and the Bush administration. But journalists who witness crimes or who gain knowledge that could prevent an act of terrorism would have to disclose what they know or saw, as should any citizen.

Indeed, under an expected House amendment, they would have to testify in certain situations where the disclosure of classified documents presented "significant and articulable harm to national security."

But the shield law would allow legitimate journalists to protect themselves and their confidential sources from government fishing expeditions and from prosecutors and civil defense attorneys who would rather not do the necessary investigative work on their own and who don't mind intimidating journalists and their sources.

Stories that change history and expose corruption, such as Watergate, depend on anonymous sources. As we've said before, so can stories such as who's going to be the next football coach -- events that have no criminal or security implications but in which significant numbers of newspaper readers are keenly interested.

Reputable news organizations do not use anonymous sources lightly, nor would they attempt to protect a spy or a child pornographer who claimed to be a journalist. News organizations and members of Congress from both parties who understand the necessity of a free flow of information are working to agree on legislation that protects journalists, their sources and national security.

A federal shield law deserves bipartisan support and passage.