Graduate School - New Brunswick Electronic Theses and Dissertations
Identifier (type = local)
rucore19991600001
Location
PhysicalLocation (authority = marcorg); (displayLabel = Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey)
NjNbRU
Identifier (type = doi)
doi:10.7282/T30P0XSG
Genre (authority = ExL-Esploro)
ETD doctoral
Abstract
Journalists often take the position that confidential sources should remain anonymous. One tool journalists invoke when pressure is exerted by the government to reveal a source’s identity is reporters’ privilege, basing this right on the First Amendment, which protects freedom of speech and the press. Yet the interpretation of exactly what this Amendment promises is much debated.
Studies on reporter’s privilege and shield laws usually focus on three arenas: historical developments (Allen, 1992), analysis of legislation and court cases (Fargo, 2006-c; Fargo, 2002; Schmid, 2001) and whether the First Amendment promisesprivilege at all (Marcus, 1983). Little research, however, looks at reporter’s privilege and shield laws through the eyes of practitioners and whether they think the threat of source exposure corrupts the newsperson’s ability to inform the public, thus hurting free speech. Similarly, there is little research on how the mainstream news media frame reporter’s privilege and shield laws and what the public thinks of them.
The first purpose of this dissertation is to understand journalists’ perceptions of the importance of the reporter/anonymous source relationship and whether they think the threat of revealing sources alters the newsgathering process by interviewing ournalists who went to jail rather than expose their sources. The second goal is to understand how reporter’s privilege and shield laws are portrayed to the public by looking at the frames four major metro newspapers, in different geographical regions,used in their editorial pages when discussing reporter’s privilege and shield laws over the span of 38 years, starting in 1972, the year of the pivotal Supreme Court decision in Branzburg v. Hayes1. The findings may provide insight into how the media explain such issues to the public and how the media establishment can better construct their narratives to educate its audience on such concerns.
The last purpose is to suggest how the public may understand the issues of shield laws and reporter’s privilege through the media they consume. The findings from focus groups conducted with three demographic groups—students, baby boomers, and seniors—provide insight into how the public may perceive and misinterpret such issues, and how media institutions can better educate the public on shield laws and reporter’s privilege.
Rutgers University. Graduate School - New Brunswick
AssociatedObject
Type
License
Name
Author Agreement License
Detail
I hereby grant to the Rutgers University Libraries and to my school the non-exclusive right to archive, reproduce and distribute my thesis or dissertation, in whole or in part, and/or my abstract, in whole or in part, in and from an electronic format, subject to the release date subsequently stipulated in this submittal form and approved by my school. I represent and stipulate that the thesis or dissertation and its abstract are my original work, that they do not infringe or violate any rights of others, and that I make these grants as the sole owner of the rights to my thesis or dissertation and its abstract. I represent that I have obtained written permissions, when necessary, from the owner(s) of each third party copyrighted matter to be included in my thesis or dissertation and will supply copies of such upon request by my school. I acknowledge that RU ETD and my school will not distribute my thesis or dissertation or its abstract if, in their reasonable judgment, they believe all such rights have not been secured. I acknowledge that I retain ownership rights to the copyright of my work. I also retain the right to use all or part of this thesis or dissertation in future works, such as articles or books.