what is journalist shield law?

Answer 1

JTM is correct.

In many states, a journalist cannot be forced to produce any sources, or even drafts of articles, notes, or even complete video tapes -- even if it means that a litigant (criminal defendant, state, or person in a civil case) cannot get the information any other way. The idea is that the First Amendment protects the "Fourth Estate," which should serve as a vital check on the branches of government. If a source had to be named, nobody would "blow the whistle" on governmental wrongdoing.

Today, the doctrine is under serious attack. Journalists are being jailed, with some regularity, if they do not name sources. This is because the FEDERAL government (and some states) do not recognize the privilege as being absolute. Journalists are, in those cases, ordered to produce information and, when they do not comply, are held in contempt of court and jailed until they divulge the information (or until the Court orders them released). It is then a matter of conscience, which upstanding journalists uphold as a matter of principal. They fear (perhaps with justification), that if they divulge their information in this case, other potential sources will not come forward (or will stop providing information).

Answer 2

38 states currently have shield laws, but there is no federal shield law, protecting journalists from having to routinely expose sources to whom they've promised confidentiality in exchange for information.

The justification for such laws is that the information the public obtains, often about governmental misconduct, outweighs the benefit of requiring the reporter to testify as to the source, and thus perhaps obtaining the testimony of the source at any trial.

Answer 3

Journalists are protected by law wherein the sources of their news cannot be divulged to anybody. This is a measure to protect the sanctity of news making.