Blog
Daily News Journal - Shield law will allow free flow of information
- By: ASNE staff
- On: 10/16/2007 15:46:36
- In: Shield law editorials
The Daily News Journal
Oct. 16, 2007
To ensure the free flow of vital information to the public, Congress should pass a federal shield law protecting the confidential relationship between reporters and sources.
The U.S. House of Representatives is expected to take u
The Daily News Journal
Oct. 16, 2007
To ensure the free flow of vital information to the public, Congress should pass a federal shield law protecting the confidential relationship between reporters and sources.
The U.S. House of Representatives is expected to take up the matter on the floor today. It shouldn't be a difficult decision.
"When neither the reporter nor his source can rely on the shield of confidentiality against unrestrained use of the grand jury's subpoena power, valuable information will not be published and the public dialogue will inevitably be impoverished." U.S. Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart wrote those words in 1972 in a dissenting opinion in Branzburg v. Hayes.
The court determined reporters could be compelled to testify, in spite of First Amendment freedoms, regarding "the commission of a crime."
The federal government still has no shield law, and Stewart's words are as pertinent as they were in the mid-1970s when two Washington Post reporters uncovered the Watergate scandal. Fortunately, Woodward and Bernstein were never forced to unveil the identity of "Deep Throat," but today reporters are becoming the first source of information for U.S. Department of Justice investigators.
Federal shield law legislation was spurred by the case involving the outing of CIA operative Valerie Plame as then-New York Times reporter Judith Miller was jailed for refusing to testify in court.
Among other things, the Free Flow of Information Act would make reporters and their notes the last source of information for U.S. Department of Justice investigators. And though reporters wouldn't enjoy "absolute privilege," the source could be compelled only if the case involved an act of terrorism or threat to national security, or identified a person who has given up trade secrets or financial and medical information in violation of federal law. The government would also have to prove "that the public interest in compelling disclosure outweighs the public interest in gathering or disseminating news or information."
Confidential sources were crucial in the breaking of news stories about conditions at Walter Reed Army Medical Center as well as torture at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq and the steroid scandal surrounding big league baseball. Stories about the National Security Agency's wiretapping program and the exposure of secret CIA foreign prisons could bring reporters into the fray again.
Therefore, it is vital that Congress pass a federal shield law as soon as possible. Otherwise, the ability of the media to report on the actions of the federal government will be further crippled.
Tennessee is among 33 states that have shield laws, proving that they do work.
A federal shield law is crucial to determining when reporters can be compelled to testify in court. This bipartisan legislation won't completely protect reporters, but it should go a long way toward turning back efforts by the U.S. Justice Department to transform reporters into an investigative arm of the federal government.