There is a simple reason why journalists should be protected from reveal their sources, even when those sources connect with criminal investigations. If they cannot protect their sources, then the public will only have access to official accounts of what has happened. People will be afraid to leak ugly and important truths to the press for fear of being outed or incarcerated.
If you do not see that this has everything to do with free speech, then I don't know how to say it better. This has to do with traditional v. citizen journalism. Josh Wolf, a Bay Area video blogger recently set a record for being incarcerated longer than anyone else for not revealing sources. But the number of regular journalists in this country who have been thrown in the slammer--or were threatened with it, has risen dramatically over the past six years.
It's not about the press. It's not about criminal prosecution. It has to do with the protections of a free society and allowing the words of people in power to be challenged.
I say all this because the Free Flow of Information Act is being reintroduced to Congress Wednesday afternoon and it needs to be supported. The last time around, Congress had a different mix and the public seemed not to care.
One of the organizations trying to inform people and rally support is the Society of Professional Journalists , which provides extensive information on shield laws and the current situation at its site. SPJ's federal shield law page has the executive summary.
If you are the type who writes your Congressperson, this would be a good time to do so.
