By John Preston
WBKO-TV (Bowling Green, Ky.)
October 2005
Excerpt:
We as journalists recognize the enormous legal risks to ourselves if we choose to report information we receive from an un-named source. If that information turns out to be false, we open ourselves (and our employers) up to a whole plethora of libel and fraud charges. Even if the information is true, we often can’t report it because the only proof we have comes from a source we can’t name. It’s all part of the business. However, protecting the public from corruption or incompetence in government (or anywhere else) requires that sources feel free to be honest and open with journalists without the fear of retribution. Without that protection it is impossible for us to provide the checks and balances that our forefathers built into the system to insure a true democratic government.
Several states around the country have shield laws to protect journalists in these situations. Most of those laws are based indirectly on the federal constitution, but there is no federal shield law. There are laws to protect lawyers and doctors from releasing information. While those professions are certainly important, neither is protected specifically by the constitution. The laws relating to those positions are designed to protect the rights of individuals (clients and patients); journalism protects the rights of all citizens.
The country should be outraged, but for the most part no one’s noticed. I’m afraid that we are getting more and more comfortable with the idea of forfeiting some of our rights as Americans. I hope you don’t think I’m implying that the current administration is corrupt; I am certainly am not doing that. I just think we have to be constantly vigilant to protect the system that protects our rights. Every time that system is weakened, we make ourselves more vulnerable to public corruption in the future. Every time we give up a right, we make it virtually impossible to regain that right back in the future.
