Should Media Shield laws be rethought?
I think a rethinking is needed. It has always been a very bad precedent to provide a group of un-regulated individuals from being protected from the courts. The Barons at Runnymede in 1215 did not like the protections and immunities that John Rex gave to some. The 1st amendment relates to Congress making a law which harasses speech or the press, the intent of the law was never to allow slander, innuendo, or espionage to be sanction by the image of law. I see a vast difference between a reporter risking his earnings to report of misdeeds which he has documented proof of wrong doing — And a reporter, invoking a “unnamed source” for a series of falsehoods and half-truths taken out of context, to promote his/her/ or their employer’s political agenda. If we have no valid safeguards against this form of propaganda — the people will lose its grasp on a government of the people. If source X takes papers from his employer which documents a criminal act by the employer — he has every right
