Pimping a Shield Law
3rd March 2008
The Washington Post, of course.
It’s obvious what advantage accrues to the MSM like the Washington Post by having a “shield law” that excuses their reporters from the obligation that every citizen has to assist the police and courts in preventing and solving crimes, but what advantage accrues to the public? The opportunity to read all about it — after it happens, when it could have been prevented?
The fact that a “source” gave information to a reporter under a promise of confidentiality doesn’t trump a citizen’s obligations under the law, media mythology to the contrary notwithstanding. If reporters feel that strongly about it, they’re free to accept the consequences of breaking the law; they just want to skate free without consequence, privileged snoopers above the fray who don’t have the same duty to prevent crime that the rest of us do.
Do the public a service and slap the next “journalist” you see. You’ll feel better for it.