South Dakota Soon To Become 40th State To Pass Journalists' Shield Law

A bill that is aimed at helping journalists to protect their sources and information was recently passed in the House and Senate in South Dakota, it's now headed to the governor for signing.

The bill reportedly only protects journalists who are employed professionally as well, it wouldn't extend protections to some independent media or bloggers for example. Under the bill, journalists and newscasters would have the right to refuse to disclose information about their sources or informants.

When passed it will make South Dakota the 40th state to pass such a law, enabling journalists to protect their sources.

"Confidential sources are vital to keeping citizens informed about our communities, our local government, our schools, our workplaces, and as well about statewide issues that have an impact on our lives in our state. And conflicts over subpoenas and other demands for information obtained during the news-gathering process have occurred in South Dakota," - Rep. J Hansen

Journalists can't do their job of informing the public if they need to be worried about having to divulge their confidential sources who want to remain anonymous for security concerns or other reasons.

The newly passed bill didn't have much opposition to it, though one representative (Rep. T Howard) did speak out against it in suggesting that the legislation wasn't necessary because the Bill of Rights should be sufficient enough protection. Her concern was that the new legislation is strictly limiting who is defined as a journalist and fears that it might limit who can use the Bill of Rights for protection.

According to the recently passed bill, its definition of a journalist is someone who is engaged for pay

"in gathering, preparing, collecting, writing, editing, filming, taping, or photographing news for publication in or with a newspaper, magazine, news agency, press association, wire service, or other professional medium or agency that has as one of its principal functions the processing and researching of news intended for publication."

If journalists and other individuals have the right to free speech as protected under the First Amendment of the Constitution then you might assume that they should be protected and prevented from having the government initiate force against them in an effort to force them to divulge information that they don't want to share. However, over the years the law governing whether or not journalists can protect their sources has become less clear and that's why various journalist organizations have pursued different legislation to try and protect their rights, in the form of Shield Laws and more.

Still, today there are many journalists who are frequently subpoenaed over information they have that might be relevant to legal proceedings, but many journalists are still reluctant to give that information up. The more that sources are forcefully revealed, the less likely that those sources will be to come forward out of fear. This will work against the interest of the people and prevent information from reaching the public that they might be much better off knowing about.

Pics:
Pic 1 -kzyx
Pic 2 - pixabay
Pic 3 - pixabay