© www.usnewsSenator (D-NY) Chuck Shumer
Capitol Hill's plan for journalistic protection is a toothless, arbitrary bill.
Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y.,
recently announced that the
Senate has the votes to pass a bill that would codify legal protections for journalists. But in defining "journalism" as a profession, Schumer's well-intentioned bill would
exclude an entire class of reporters who play a vital role in delivering news to their communities. Instead of trying to cast a tight definition of who is and isn't a "journalist,"
Congress should be protecting journalism as a whole.Last year's flurry of federal scandals - including the National Security Agency's domestic surveillance and the Justice Department's investigations of reporters - cast a renewed focus on the constitutional privileges afforded to journalists and
gaps in the law that allow the government to prosecute reporters who choose to protect their sources. A new media shield law could help further protect the press from government harassment, so long as Congress understands that "journalism" is an act, not a profession.
As proposed,
Schumer's bill would be a federal version of "shield laws" that already exist in 48 states. Significantly, those laws protect reporters from being compelled to identify their sources. In effect, the
legislation would bolster First Amendment protections by preventing courts from punishing journalists who refuse to give up their sources. Although this is a worthy cause,
the bill would limit these protections to those who fit the very narrow parameters of what Congress considers "the press." These parameters focus on a reporter's salary, employer and frequency of publication, and
exclude those who don't fit the traditional mold of a journalist.
Comment: