Wikileaks Decides: If The US Gov't Won't Create A Real Shield Law, We'll Shield Journalists Instead
from the technology-to-the-rescue dept
With the US federal gov't continually watering down and limiting any attempt at a federal shield law to help protect journalists from being pressured into revealing their sources, it looks like the site Wikileaks wants to help. It's trying to set up a system, whereby a source can leak information directly to a journalist for a period of time, before Wikileaks goes public with the info. But, either way, Wikileaks promises to protect the source, keeping the journalist separate from the source. While I have no idea if this particular program will actually work, it does show the futility of politicians trying to water down such a shield law. It seems like every time politicians try to do these sorts of things, the internet comes to the rescue with its own solutions.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: journalism, shield law, wikileaks
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Clearly this is a subversion of democracy and a clear and present threat. I hope Wikileaks likes it on the Terrorist Watch List...
[/Sarcasm]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Defending democracy
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Gov'ment
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Gov'ment
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Straw Man
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Straw Man
Err, in many cases that is exactly what may happen.
...it's about preventing people from refusing to cooperate in police investigations....
And journalists ARE people.
...by claiming that their Twitter account gives them a shield.
I find your claim that it would only apply to Twitter accounts to be deceptive. In fact, the law doesn't even mention Twitter. Talk about straw men. Oh well, I give you credit for at least being honest enough to disclose "Straw Man" in your subject line.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Straw Man
Journalists who would either
A: Censor it
B: Report it and make it their intellectual property.
No thanks. The laws should allow me to communicate it directly to the public, anonymously, without making it anyone's intellectual property. PERIOD.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I would say that they are being fools.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Some people are willing to go out on a limb and risk their own personal interests for the sake of doing good in the world. Some people can't understand why anyone would do anything other than what's in their own best interest and call those who would "fools".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
John 8:32
-- John 8:32
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
RE RE Straw Man
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
mls search
Terrence
mls search
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: mls search
Terrence
mls search
[ link to this | view in chronology ]