The Long Arm of the Law: Should It Include Journalists?

The Society of Professional Journalists recently took on the Bush Administration, the Department of Justice, and the Senate in an attempt to encourage the passage of a new section of the Free Flow of Information Act which would protect journalists from having to testify in legal cases or reveal their sources in court.

People have been speaking out to politicians such as Joe Lieberman to fight against the amendment in the belief that it would, "make the United States both less secure and less free by subverting the enforcement of criminal laws and the Federal Government's investigatory powers" (Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs, 2008). On the other side, journalists argue that this new section will encourage people to speak out as well as help the public's right to know.

The exact language of the amendment was not included in the SPJ's article, but a Web site by the Dept. of Justice has been set up to provide a forum for viewpoints on it.

From an ethical standpoint, journalists should not have to reveal their sources. The promise of anonymity to any informant gives citizens incentive to share whatever information they may have. Journalism is our greatest monitor of power, and the public plays a crucial role in maintaining that position. While law enforcement is also vital to the health of our nation, the people's right to give and receive information is the very foundation of our country and its values.