tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8139998.post166946249507832591..comments2023-10-30T05:02:14.896-04:00Comments on Media Law: Reporter's Privilege Protects Globe Reporter from Testifying in Street Performer's LawsuitBob Ambrogihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15138223577884298271noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8139998.post-51510040900816322292011-04-25T20:07:39.016-04:002011-04-25T20:07:39.016-04:00This is an interesting case. There have been many...This is an interesting case. There have been many cases that have dealt with shield laws over the years. It seems in civil cases such as this the reporters privilege is given to reporters but during criminal cases the reporter’s privilege does not always seem to be guaranteed. The In re Madden decision gave standards as to whether a person was a journalist, and standards as to what a person had to do to be a journalist. This decision, even though it ruled against the defendant, gave precedent that there was a reporter’s privilege not to release their sources. <br />This makes it seem cut and dry, but the Brandenburg v. Hayes decision previously held that a reporter did have to reveal sources in a criminal investigation. The reasoning behind this decision was that a regular person did not enjoy a privilege of withholding information from a government investigation, so there was no reason to believe that a journalist should be able to do so. <br />The Brandenburg v. Hayes decision was used in the 2004 case involving the outing of CIA operative Valery Plame. The court subpoenaed two reporters, who refused to answer the subpoenas because of their belief in the reporter’s privelage. The two reporters were found in contempt of court and were sentenced to 8 months in jail, one journalist being released only after his source allowed him to break their confidentiality agreement. <br /> Carey v. Hume gave the precedent that requiring journalists to testify in court should be used as a last resort, only to be used when all other options had been exhausted.<br />In this case, the reporter did not have to give up their information because the plaintiff did not exhaust all of their other options before subpoenaing the journalist. <br />What if the person had exhausted their options? <br />The Judge may have had to require the journalist to come to court and testify, which would nullify the idea of a reporters privilege.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17252113928491941208noreply@blogger.com