FELDSTED: Journalistic protection of sources works for the benefit of society most of the time, but is not inviolate
'Dark day for press
freedom': Vice must give ISIS notes to police, top court rules
Catharine Tunney ~~ CBC News ~~ Nov 30, 2018
Catharine Tunney ~~ CBC News ~~ Nov 30, 2018
A Vice Media reporter will have to hand over
records of his conversations with an alleged ISIS member to police following a
Supreme Court of Canada decision. In
the unanimous decision released Friday, the top court upheld a lower
court's ruling regarding the work of reporter Ben Makuch. The case was seen as
pitting journalists' interest in protecting their sources against the
state's duty to investigate crimes.
CLICK HERE to read full
story:
Freedom of the press does not remove a reporter’s
ethical obligation to report a crime to authorities, or … to resist making
relevant evidence available. Protecting sources does not include protecting
criminals from arrest and facing due process. ISIS targets Canada and her
allies.
No one blocked Makuch from writing his stories, or
Vice Media from printing them. Press freedom was not interfered with. Protecting sources is a time-honoured
tradition in the media. Journalists
could not get to the roots of problems if they could not provide anonymity to
those they interview.
That raises ethical concerns when the source is
actively engaged in criminal activity. And that, is the issue the Supreme Court
was dealing with.
Can the protection of public security and safety
override the protection of sources? The
answer is ‘yes’ … provided that the journalist is given full opportunity to
argue his case for protection. It is a
matter of applying common sense.
Journalistic protection of sources works for the
benefit of society most of the time, but is not inviolate.
John Feldsted
Political Consultant
& Strategist
Winnipeg, Manitoba
Comments
Post a Comment