Houses passes federal shield bill

A federal shield bill that would give reporters a qualified privilege from revealing confidential sources was passed by the U.S. House of Representatives on Tuesday night.

H.R. 985, known as the Free Flow of Information Act of 2009, was passed by a voice vote under a suspension of the rules, a typical procedure used to pass non-controversial bills. The bill is identical to the bill that was passed in 2007 by a vote of 398 to 21.

Rep. Rick Boucher (D-Va) sponsored the bill with Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind), Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-Va), and Rep. John Conyers (D-Mi). The sponsors and Rep. Ted Poe (R-Tex) all spoke out in favor of the bill.

“This is protecting the public’s right to know,” Pence said during the debate.

Despite the law’s swift passage, there was some criticism of the law during the debate. Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Tex) voiced stern opposition to the bill, saying that there is “no evidence of a need” for a shield law and that the law would improperly “allow reporters to avoid a civic duty.”

In a letter circulated to House members today, Smith urged a rejection of the law.

Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) also voiced opposition during the debate, arguing that privileges should only protect “skilled” and licensed professions such as priests, doctors and attorneys.

The law will provide a qualified privilege for journalists with exceptions for national security, the prevention of death or bodily harm, or information that is deemed essential in a criminal case or critical in a civil suit.

The bill defines a journalist as someone who regularly reports and writes for a substantial portion of the person’s livelihood or for substantial financial gain.http://www.rcfp.org/newsitems/index.php?i=10682

The NSA – a spy agency so secret it even redacts its feats

WASHINGTON — For much of its history, the government’s most-secretive intelligence agency sought to conceal its very existence.

So it was a surprise last year when university researchers persuaded the National Security Agency to hand over a top-secret, 1,000-page account of its Cold War spying.

George Washington University plans to release the report today, giving historians a rare look inside the agency that gathers intelligence through eavesdropping. But one thing appears to be missing: Many of its biggest successes.Not wanting to reveal too much, NSA blanked out sensitive chunks of the account that, according to intelligence experts, appear to chronicle espionage breakthroughs. What remains makes it appear that the world’s largest ear has been a bit deaf.

According to the declassified report, government eavesdroppers generated half of their intelligence reports just after World War II from listening in on the French. Code breakers missed a key tip-off in the Cuban Missile Crisis. The report also suggests that, for the most part, the government couldn’t crack high-grade Soviet communications codes between World War II and the 1970s.

“This was a perfect opportunity for NSA to put its best foot forward,” says Matthew Aid, an intelligence historian who pressed the agency to release the report and plans to publish his own NSA history next year. “Instead what you’re left with is a fair to middling picture of this agency.”http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122660908325125509.html

F.B.I.’s Use of Phone Records Shows Need to Protect the Press, Senators Say

WASHINGTON — Two leading senators said Monday that they were troubled by the F.B.I.’s collection of the phone records of four reporters at The New York Times and The Washington Post and that the episode showed a “pressing need” for legislation pending in the Senate that would provide greater legal protection for journalists.

Last week, the Federal Bureau of Investigation disclosed to the two newspapers that it had improperly obtained the phone records of reporters in their Indonesian bureaus in 2004 by using emergency records demands from telephone providers as part of an investigation. Robert S. Mueller III, the director of the bureau, made personal calls to Bill Keller, executive editor of The Times, and Leonard Downie Jr., executive editor of The Post, to apologize. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/12/us/12fbi.html?ex=1376280000&en=03ad57490c69b496&ei=5124&partner=permalink&exprod=permalink

Media Shield BIll Is Put Aside, For Now

Wall Street Journal – WASHINGTON — A bill that would let reporters protect the identities of confidential sources was blocked in the Senate, with supporters hoping to take it up again later this year. The Senate fell short of the 60-vote threshold needed to move to debate on the bill, sponsored by Sen. Arlen Specter (R., Pa.). The measure would allow reporters to protect sources’ identities with exceptions for national security or preventing death or bodily harm. Republicans said Wednesday that they voted against the bill in order to keep the Senate’s focus on energy legislation. Democratic and Republican leaders have been unable to come to an agreement on how to proceed on the energy issue, forcing an impasse on nearly every other issue before the body.http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121746902203199495.html

Music Critic Ordered to Testify in R. Kelly Child Pornography Trial

May 30, 2008 1:11 PM: Sun-Times music critic ordered to testify

Chicago Tribune – Sun-Times music critic Jim DeRogatis must testify at R. Kelly’s child pornography trial, a judge ruled today.

Cook County Judge Vincent Gaughan said DeRogatis–who provided the police with the sex tape at the heart of the case–is not protected by any reporter’s privilege or the 1st Amendment because he is the first person known to have possessed the video.

The defense has the right to question him about what he may have done with the VHS cassette between the time he received it and the moment he handed it over to the authorities, according to the ruling.

The Sun-Times will appeal the decision, attorney Damon Dunn said.

Gaughan will not allow the defense to ask him about his sources or subpoena any reporting notes he took before he gave the tape to a law-enforcement official, according to the ruling. However, he must turn over notes from an interview he conducted after police began investigating the case.

DeRogatis most likely will assert his 5th Amendment right against self-incrimination and not answer certain questions while on the stand, his lawyer said.

The defense intends to question DeRogatis about whether he manipulated, morphed or copied the video after receiving it. The singer’s attorneys contend the music critic–who spent years chronicling the R&B superstar’s relationships with young women–has a personal vendetta against Kelly.

“The bias was so strong it compelled the reporter to break the law,” said Kelly’s attorney, Marc Martin.

Last week, Kelly’s team suggested that DeRogatis copied the sex tape and showed it to Stephanie “Sparkle” Edwards, a relative of the video’s alleged female participant. If that happened, it’s possible he might have broken the state’s laws against reproduction, possession and dissemination of child pornography, the defense says.

Both the judge and the defense, however, acknowledge the statute of limitations ran out on any copying or screening of the tape in 2002. If he still has a copy–or had it within the past three years–it’s possible he may have broken the law, Gaughan said.

The judge has repeatedly warned reporters covering the case that the 1st Amendment does not give them the right to possess or show censored versions of the sex tape. “Possession of child pornography is a crime,” he said Friday.http://www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/chi-r-kelly-trial-witness-may30,0,6706922.story

Ex-USA Today Reporter Could Face Big Fines

Toni Locy, a former USA Today reporter, could face some tough and expensive decisions beginning next week.

Ms. Locy has defied a court order to reveal the sources she used in stories that named a government researcher as “a person of interest” in an FBI investigation into a string of post-9/11 anthrax attacks. A federal judge will decide as early as next week whether to fine Ms. Locy $5,000 a day for refusing to give up those names.

Courts in the last few years have been stepping-up pressure on reporters to identify sources used in politically sensitive stories, including pieces about the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and the steroids investigation of the Bay Area Laboratory Cooperative, or Balco.

What makes Ms. Locy’s case different is that the judge may force her to pay the daily fines out of her own pocket. Ms. Locy now teaches journalism at West Virginia University, where she earns $75,000 a year. She says she has no savings to speak of. U.S. District Court Judge Reggie B. Walton has said he would raise the daily fine with each week that the dispute drags on — requiring her to pay $500 a day for the first week, $1,000 a day in the second week, and $5,000 a day in the third week. (Gannett Co., which publishes USA Today, has been paying for Ms. Locy’s legal bills.)

If Ms. Locy were to hold out for three weeks, she would owe $45,500, or about 60% of her salary. She said her journalism students have offered to hold a bake sale to raise some of the money, but she doesn’t even know if the judge would allow that because the funds would be coming from someone else. “I’ll be bankrupt in a matter of days,” Ms. Locy said in a telephone interview this weekhttp://online.wsj.com/article/SB120371390819286561.html

http://www.rcfp.org/news/2008/0219-con-judgef.html

Attempts to Lock up Information

Recent days have brought two federal court decisions with disputed First Amendment legitimacy. In San Francisco, District Judge Jeffrey White acceded to a request by a Cayman Islands bank to shut access to the Web site Wikileaks.org, which “invites people to post leaked materials with the goal of discouraging ‘unethical behavior’ by corporations and governments,” as the New York Times reports. In this case, the bank, Julius Baer Bank and Trust, accused “a disgruntled ex-employee” of giving stolen documents to Wikileaks in violation of banking laws and a confidentiality agreement. Wikileaks says the documents allegedly reveal structures the bank uses for hiding assets, tax evasion and money laundering. Judge White granted a permanent injunction ordering Wikileaks’ domain-name registrar to disable its Internet domain name. But the Times says that action “suggests that the bank, and the judge, did not understand how the domain system works,” since the site can still be accessed at its Internet Protocol address, http://88.80.13.160/, and its Wikileaks domains remain registered in other countries.

In the other case, District Judge Reggie Walton in Washington ordered former USA Today reporter Toni Locy to pay $500 per day after finding her in contempt of court for refusing to identify sources who told her about a suspect in the 2001 anthrax attacks. The suspicions she reported indeed existed — former Army scientist Steven Hatfill was publicly identified as a “person of interest” in the case by the attorney general at the time — but Mr. Hatfill is suing the government and arguing his reputation was destroyed by media leaks. Judge Walton agreed that the sources of Ms. Loci — now a journalism professor — were important for Mr. Hatfill’s suit, and he ordered her to pay the $500 a day until she names them and said the amount would soon escalate to $5,000 a day, as USA Today reports. She has declined to give up her sources, and Judge White postponed the penalty to allow her to appeal the contempt ruling.http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120356120676681971.html

Reporter Held in Contempt

WASHINGTON, Feb. 20 (UPI) — A federal judge in Washington held a newspaper reporter in contempt of court for not identifying sources who named a suspect in the 2001 anthrax attack. U.S. District Judge Reggie Walton said Tuesday he would begin fining Toni Locy of USA Today $500 per day, escalating to $5,000 per day, until she tells who identified former U.S. Army scientist Steven Hatfill as a possible suspect in the attacks that killed five people, USA Today reported Wednesday. Walton said he would consider postponing the penalty to allow Locy to appeal. Walton also delayed a decision on whether to hold former CBS reporter James Stewart in contempt for not disclosing his sources on the matter.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/20/us/20anthrax.html?ex=1361250000&en=5b642bca7ebe21e0&ei=5124&partner=permalink&exprod=permalink

http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/Top_News/2008/02/20/reporter_held_in_contempt_in_anthrax_case/2413/

USA Today Cuts Use of Anonymous Sources

Anonymous sources can play an important role in breaking an explosive story, but that anonymity requires trust — in sources, but also the reporters themselves.

Last year, USA Today acknowledged that its former star reporter, Jack Kelley, fabricated quotes and entire stories. He hid some of his fictional anecdotes behind unnamed sources.Many newspapers have tried to tighten their rules allowing the use of confidential sources, but no major paper has taken a harder line than USA Today.http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4815420

Utah Supreme Court adopts Shield Law

Jan. 25, 2008 · The Utah Supreme Court adopted a comprehensive reporter’s shield rule on Wednesday, providing protection for reporters from damaging requests to identify confidential sources and obtain newsgathering information.
http://www.rcfp.org/news/2008/0125-con-states.html