Should an Online Blogger Be Protected by the Illinois Reporter’s Privilege?

The question that this paper answer is whether the Illinois Reporter’s Privilege should protect an online blogger. The definitions of the terms “reporter,” “news medium,” and “source” quoted from 735 ILCS 5/8-902, followed by several examples. Second, a brief history of journalism is presented, where it is demonstrated that for hundreds of years, journalists and publishers alike engaged in their profession with little formal training, but rather with a sincere desire to convey the facts and the truth to their peers. Second, the essay outlines how Illinois and federal courts have employed the privilege in case law. In answering the question, the work examines whether WikiLeaks qualifies under the Illinois Reporter’s Privilege. The position taken is that the answer is yes. The idea is that if WikiLeaks qualifies under the privilege, then other online blogs also qualify. The opinion of the author is that the law is sufficient as it stands. There is no need to change its wording. Finally, some loose ends are discussed before reiterating the conclusion that the Illinois Reporters’ should not be changed.

The Press, National Security, and Civil Discourse

The Constitution expressly provides protection for the freedom of the press. Yet there is one area in which the press is not so free: the freedom to refuse disclosing confidential sources when subpoenaed by the federal government. Currently, there is no federal reporter’s privilege. The Supreme Court has held the First Amendment provides no such protection, and repeated congressional attempts to codify a reporter’s privilege in a federal shield law have failed. Arguments against a shield law include national security concerns and the struggle to precisely define “journalist.” Such concerns were evident in the most recently proposed shield law, the Free Flow of Information Act of 2017. This Comment advocates in favor of passing a federal shield law. Specifically, this Comment analyzes the Free Flow of Information Act of 2017 against the backdrop of a post-9/11 America where “fake news” runs rampant. Though far from perfect, the proposed law was a step toward balancing national security concerns with press freedom. Legislators can and should strike an effective balance between these two tensions by accurately defining terms like “national security” and “properly classified” to prevent government overreach. Finally, this Comment argues that a federal shield law is necessary to combat the recent national security concerns raised by “fake news” and thereby reaffirm media credibility.