Why There Should Not Be An Absolute Journalist's Privilege

Playing second fiddle to stories denying review of Judith Miller's and Matthew Cooper's appeal of the contempt orders against them is the assertion of privilege by four journalists in the Wen Ho Lee case.

"Lee has filed a lawsuit alleging government officials leaked information about him to reporters, violating the Privacy Act in pointing to him as a suspect in the possible theft of nuclear secrets for China."

There needs to be accountability when anonymous sources use reporters as conduits to violate an individual's legal rights or to commit crimes. I understand the need for the free flow of information, but the issues concerning the journalistic privilege only arise once there has been a lawsuit filed or a criminal investigation undertaken. The courts then only allow parties to seek the info from reporters once its determined it is relevant and other adequate efforts to obtain the information elsewhere have been made. I believe the courts have got it right. If an anonymous source is providing honest information and is not acting in violation of the law there will be no problem.

That reporters place a higher value on the privacy rights of their powerful sources over the privacy rights of less powerful people like Wen Ho Lee strikes me as self-serving. That reporters will aid their sources in engaging in smears of political opponents in exchanging for a hot tip on another good story (as I believe happens) strikes me as self-indulgent and, in fact, dangerous to a healthy and transparent debate.