Olympian — Federal law is needed to shield reporters

• By: ASNE staff
• On: 06/27/2008 16:13:32
• In: Shield law editorials

The Olympian, Olympia, Wash.
June 27, 2008

Attorney General Rob McKenna has added Washington to a growing list of states in support of a federal law to protect reporters who refuse to name their confidential sources. Washington and dozens of other states have so-called shield laws, so it’s time Congress adopted federal protections.

Washington legislators passed a shield law that was signed into law by Gov. Chris Gregoire on April 27, 2007. The law grants reporters absolute privilege for protecting confidential sources the same exemption from testifying in court that is granted to spouses, attorneys, clergy and police officers.

Reporters act on behalf of the public as they ferret out wrongdoing and bring misbehavior into the light of day. They sometimes need to shield the name of their confidential informants in order to collect key documents or information.

A reporter’s first preference always is to get the necessary information “on the record,” with the name of the source disclosed. The Olympian’s policy, as noted on our Web site (www.theolympian. com) states, “We name our sources. The use of unidentified sources in published material requires the approval of a managing editor or the highest-ranking editor available.”

Before the shield law, a reporter in Washington could not promise confidentiality unless he or she was willing to run the risk of going to jail for failing to name that source. The state House of Representatives changed that last year with the adoption of House Bill 1366 on a vote of 94-1. The Senate vote was 41-6, making Washington the 33rd state to shield reporters from jail for refusing to name their sources.

Now, the focus has shifted to the national level.

McKenna and his colleagues have signed a letter drafted by the National Association of Attorneys General urging the U.S. Senate to adopt a federal shield bill.

Last fall, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a shield bill (HB 2101) on a lopsided vote of 398-21. The Senate version (SB 2035) passed out of the Judiciary Committee 15-4 but has not been scheduled for a floor vote.

It’s time for a floor vote, especially in light of the recent case of Toni Locy, a former USA Today journalist. A federal court judge, Reggie Walton, in February ordered Locy to pay contempt fines up to $5,000 a day for refusing to name her source in a privacy case brought against the federal government. In that shocking ruling, Judge Walton said Locy had to pay the fine out of her own pocket, prohibiting her family members or former employer from contributing to the fine.

That ruling, which is on appeal, makes a clear case why a shield law is needed at the federal level.

Think about it: Would the public and Congress know about the abuses at Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington, D.C., if it weren’t for reporters using confidential sources to bring the lack of care for wounded soldiers into the light of day? What about ground-breaking stories on the Enron scandal and steroid abuses in Major League Baseball, all of which relied on confidential sources?

These are important national stories, and reporters uncovering wrongdoing on the public’s behalf deserve protections afforded them only under a federal shield law.

It’s time for the U.S. Senate to act.