University of Virginia Library

Interfering With The Press

With increasing frequency in the past
couple of years, the Justice Department has
attempted to subpoena journalists to assist it
in prosecuting cases. Generally, the subpoena
requires that the newspaperman turn his notes
over to the prosecution which culls them for
evidence which might be used against the
defendants in the particular case.

Newspapers and magazines are fighting
back at last. The most recent example
concerns a San Francisco correspondent for
the New York Times whose notes have been
subpoenaed in connection with the trial of
several West Coast members of the Black
Panther party. The Times, along with the
publishers of Time and Newsweek is protesting
the move and seeking to block the Justice
Department's attempt.

It seems that the Times correspondent,
Earl Caldwell, may have turned up information
which the Justice Department could use
against the Panthers. The journalists contend,
however, that if the notes are forced into
evidence, an integral part of the newsman's
relationship with news makers will be destroyed.

They contend that journalists ought to be
allowed the same type of privileged communication
accorded to lawyers if they are to
function effectively. If, for example, the
Panthers were convicted on evidence wrested
from the New York Times, or if demonstrators
are identified and convicted from films
made by television crews, it may be
impossible for those media representatives to
report on or investigate similar groups in the
future. The fact that such a situation might
lead to a slanting of the news in favor of the
opponents of such groups as the Panthers has
probably not escaped the notice of the
Attorney General and his cohorts.

Moreover, the government is getting into
tricky straits when it forces members of the
free press to act, in effect, as its agents in a
prosecution attempt. The Justice Department
ought to do its own leg work.