Thursday, December 3, 2009

Congress is working on a journalist shield law

Used to be, when a court wanted someone's testimony in a trial, that someone received a sub poena and that was that. There were some exceptions, clergy were not required to testify to things learned in the confessional, doctors were not required to testify against patients, lawyers were not required to testify against clients, and wives were not required to testify against husbands. Other than that, judges held persons refusing to testify in comtempt, and jailed them.
Used to be, newpaper reporters were required to testify just like real people. The reporters cried and wailed about protection of "sources" and in some states managed to get "shield laws" passed to releave them of their duty to testify in court. The reporters claimed that no one would talk to them if the reporter might be forced to repeat what they said in court. Actually, sources speak to reporters to get their story into the papers, and long as sources have stories they want printed, they will talk to reporters.
Up til now, federal courts stood for no nonsense from reporters, testify or go to jail. Nor long ago, a lady New York Times reporter spend months in jail for refusing to testify in the Valerie Plame affair.
The reporter's union just got a federal shield law into the hopper in Congress.
InstaPundit observed that a couple of lawmakers want to amend the shield law to leave out bloggers and protect only the MSM reporters.
Me, I feel both reporters and bloggers have a civic duty to testify in court.

No comments: