On August 1, 2006, a federal district judge sent Josh Wolf, a freelance video journalist and blogger, to prison. Wolf, a recent college graduate who did not work for a mainstream media organization at the time, captured video footage of an anti-capitalist protest in California and posted portions of the video on his blog. As part of an investigation into charges against protestors whose identities were unknown, federal prosecutors subpoenaed Wolf to testify before a grand jury and to hand over the unpublished portions of his video. Wolf refused to comply with the subpoena, arguing that the First Amendment allows journalists to shield their newsgathering materials. The judge disagreed, and, as a result, Wolf spent 226 days in federal prison.
This Comment argues that Congress should adopt a broad federal shield law that would cover many citizen journalists—individuals, like Wolf, who lack professional training and have no affiliation with a mainstream media organization. Commentators generally agree that a federal shield law should cover traditional journalists, and some have argued that it should also cover certain online writers (who increasingly have attempted to invoke the privilege in both state and federal courts). But many commentators worry that protecting citizen journalists would allow “every self-appointed newsperson” to hide behind the privilege, resulting in significant social and economic costs. This Comment demonstrates both that citizen journalists should be covered and that Congress can protect them without causing an avalanche of negative consequences.
The author is a third-year student at the Yale Law School.
