The journalist's duty to go to jail: Confidential sources, journalism ethics and freedom of the press

Beginning in 2001, legal protections for American journalists seeking to protect confidential sources began to weaken in the federal courts, and three individuals seeking to protect source confidentiality and newsgathering information record-long jail sentences. In the first decade of the 21 st century, the threat of government subpoenas has raised both old and new legal and ethical problems for journalists, at a time when journalistic independence and authority has come under attack by profound economic and social changes.;This dissertation examines the historical development of the journalist's privilege and the dynamic interaction that has existed among journalism ethics, free-press theory and legal jurisprudence. The research traces the ethical and legal evolution of the privilege drawing on research into cases in the 19th century, the First Amendment principle that emerged in the middle of the 20th century, the public policy implications debated in congressional hearings in the 1970s, and the rise and fall of common law protections in the federal courts between 1972 and 2003.;This thesis asserts that journalistic duty to protect confidential sources has been a central ethical norm in the professional development of journalism with roots as far back as the colonial era; that this ethical norm has been transformed into legal principles of statutory, constitutional and common law to varying degrees; and that these ethical norms support the basis for a broadly recognized journalist's privilege in law, although one that is less than absolute. The historical development of these ethical norms also provide guidance for resolving modern legal problems, including the limits of the privilege, how judges might conduct "public-interest balancing," and in determining who should be recognized as a journalist eligible for the privilege.