Journalists and their sources
"If journalists were made to name their sources, very little information would succeed in reaching the public domain. It is written in the National Union of Journalist's code of conduct that under no circumstances can sources be divulged, and, on the whole, the courts have accepted that. The code forbids journalists from divulging information that has been passed to them. It says that a journalist:
"At all times upholds and defends the principle of media freedom, the right of freedom of expression and the right of the public to be informed".
It states that a journalist should differentiate between fact and opinion. The code of conduct also says that a journalist:
"Protects the identity of sources who supply information in confidence and material gathered in the course of her/his work".
Those who have sought to legally challenge journalists to name their sources have made very little headway. It usually ends up with the reporter coming out a hero for standing his or her ground."
So was that an extract from the submission by the defence lawyer appearing on behalf of the Sunday Tribune's Northern Editor Suzanne Breen during her court case this afternoon? Ms Breen is refusing to hand over her notes, laptop and phone to detectives investigating the recent dissident violence.
No. It was an extract from Lord Morrow's speech last month to the Assembly during the debate in which MLAs supported Ian Paisley Junior over his refusal to identify his source to the Billy Wright inquiry. The text of the debate can be found
I'm 
Comments