The US Free Flow of Information Act protects journalistic
sources generally, but does include several exceptions regarding
terrorism, national security, imminent death and trade secret
leaks.
The US case has been championed by Republican Rich Boucher in
the wake of several recent high profile federal court cases in
which journalists were threatened with or actually forced to serve
time in jail if they did not overturn confidential sources.
More than 30 US states already have shield laws on the statute
books, and the new bill is an attempt to provide the same
protection at the federal level.
There were concerns that the initial version of the bill would
apply to all bloggers – but now the definition of a journalist has
been narrowed.
The modified bill which passed the committee on 2nd August
included a provision that limits its protections to those who make
"financial gain or livelihood" from their journalism.
This essentially means that most individual bloggers, who may
make a small income from Google adverts, seem unlikely to get
protection – though this will depend on how broadly the courts
interpret "financial gain."
The US Society of Professional Journalists pushed to keep the
definition as broad as possible. A spokesman said: "While it's
important to distinguish responsible journalists from casual
bloggers, the more narrow the language defining who is a
journalist, the less impact the bill will have."
Boucher told the committee that "the best information about
corruption in government or misdeeds in a private organisation will
come from someone on the inside who feels a responsibility to bring
that information to light." He argued that such whistle-blowers
will not come forward unless they know their confidentiality will
be respected.
More than 40 US media companies and journalism bodies agreed. In
supporting the bill, the Newspaper Association of America, said:
"The journalist is becoming the first stop, rather than the last
resort, for civil litigants and prosecutors attempting to obtain
the identity of confidential sources."
The Bill will need approval from the House of Representatives
and Senate before it becomes law.
In the UK, the Contempt of Court Act 1981 protects journalists
and uses language that is likely to extend this protection to
bloggers. It states: "No court may require a person to disclose,
nor is any person guilty of contempt of court for refusing to
disclose, the source of information contained in a publication for
which he is responsible, unless it be established to the
satisfaction of the court that disclosure is necessary in the
interests of justice or national security or for the prevention of
disorder or crime."
One of the highest profile UK cases under this Act was in 1983
when the Guardian newspaper was forced to reveal Sarah Tisdall as
the source of leaked documents detailing when American cruise
missile nuclear weapons were due to arrive on British soil. The
Guardian's argument that it was protected by the Act was
rejected.
Journalists are also expected to comply with the National Union
of Journalists' Code of Conduct which states that journalists must
"[Protect] the identity of sources who supply information in
confidence and material gathered in the course of [their]
work".
