Blog
Tennessean — Congress wrestles to find balanced shield law for media
- By: ASNE staff
- On: 08/19/2008 11:13:40
- In: Shield law editorials
The Tennessean, Nashville
August 18, 2008
There's a delay in U.S. Senate consideration of a proposal to “shield” journalists from many federal subpoenas seeking disclosure of confidential sources.
Supporters now hope to get a vote after Congress returns from summ
The Tennessean, Nashville
August 18, 2008
There's a delay in U.S. Senate consideration of a proposal to “shield” journalists from many federal subpoenas seeking disclosure of confidential sources.
Supporters now hope to get a vote after Congress returns from summer recess. The proposed law the Free Flow of Information Act was headed for a vote until it got caught in an unrelated procedural stalemate over energy policy. The House passed a similar bill in October.
Congress gets to play outside during its recess, but we can use this timeout to sort out where all the sides there are more than two line up on Senate Bill 2035:
- Supporters, who include Republicans and Democrats, say such shield-law protection is needed not just to protect reporters, but also to offer assurance to whistle-blowers and others who give the public information about government or private misdeeds through those journalists' work.
- Opponents, including a variety of federal agencies, say the proposed law would make it difficult if not impossible to combat terrorist threats quickly, and thus would endanger national security. U.S. Attorney General Michael Mukasey also told a Senate hearing that he feared the law would weaken an administration's power to safeguard classified information.
- Critics of the proposal include those who favor such a law, but object to any law that defines who is a journalist. This particular bill would shield those who (take a deep breath here if reading aloud) are engaged in “the regular gathering, preparing, collecting, photographing, recording, writing, editing, reporting, or publishing of news or information that concerns local, national, or international events or other matters of public interest for dissemination to the public.”
- Supporters range well beyond just reporters and editors; nearly all state attorneys general have embraced the proposal (most states have such laws). The bill has been endorsed by both major presidential candidates, Sens. John McCain and Barack Obama.
Then there are whistleblowers those hardy souls willing to disclose government waste, unethical conduct and such, at the risk of job, reputation or more. At present, there's no guaranteed protection in federal courtrooms for journalists who accept confidential information.
The Senate proposal offers something for many and probably completely satisfies none. The legislation does not shield spies, terrorists, crooks or eyewitnesses to criminal acts. Nor does the protection from subpoena apply in cases where officials can show there is imminent danger of death, kidnapping or serious injury. But government officials would have to show that their concerns go beyond protecting a too-often-wielded “classified” stamp on a document, and involve a real threat to the nation's security.
It's worth noting in passing that some say journalists should never use confidential sources, in the interests of improving accuracy and credibility. Others say confidentiality must remain a journalistic tool because without anonymity, many sources won't ever speak to the press for fear of retribution and the public could suffer as a result.