Digital Media Law

Chapter 6:
Newsgathering

Chapter 6 focuses on the legal boundaries of newsgathering — how far journalists can go to “get the story” and what legal risks they face while doing so. The chapter emphasizes that while the press plays a critical role in a democracy, it is not exempt from laws of general application. Students will explore issues such as trespassing, wiretapping, use of hidden cameras, harassment, fraud, and reliance on confidential sources, while considering how courts and policymakers balance press freedom with individual rights and public safety.

Key Concepts in this Chapter

Limits of Press Freedom

  • The First Amendment protects the right to publish, not unlimited freedom to gather information.

  • Journalists are subject to the same general laws as everyone else.

Trespassing

  • Journalists may report from public spaces (streets, sidewalks, airports) without permission.

  • Entering private property without consent, even for news purposes, is trespassing.

  • Filming from public vantage points into private spaces is typically allowed.

Wiretapping & Recording Laws

  • Governed federally by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act.

  • Single-party consent states: legal if one participant consents.

  • All-party (multi-party) consent states: require consent from everyone involved.

  • Hidden camera footage often raises issues under these laws.

Harassment & Stalking

  • A single attempt at contact is usually lawful.

  • Patterns of conduct intended to annoy, alarm, or cause fear may rise to harassment or stalking.

  • Digital age increases risks of journalists facing these charges — or being victims of them.

Fraud & Misrepresentation

  • Occurs when journalists misrepresent themselves to gain access or cooperation.

  • Food Lion v. ABC (1992): ABC reporters used false identities to get jobs and secretly recorded. Court ruled against ABC for fraud and trespass, even though the story exposed real misconduct.

Confidential Sources & Reporter’s Privilege

  • Some states have shield laws protecting journalists from being compelled to reveal sources.

  • Not universal — and scope varies widely.

  • Courts balance free press interests against law enforcement needs.

Using Illegally Obtained Information

  • Supreme Court in Bartnicki v. Vopper: Journalists may publish information obtained illegally if they did not participate in the illegal act and the information is of public concern.

Test Your Knowledge

1. A journalist jailed for civil contempt due to refusal to comply with a subpoena may be detained:

 
 
 
 

2. In Food Lion v. ABC, the jury awarded the supermarket over $5 million primarily as:

 
 
 
 

3. The terms “off the record” and “on background” are described in Chapter 6 as:

 
 
 
 

4. The primary federal statute governing interception of electronic communications is the:

 
 
 
 

5. California’s reporter shield is especially strong because it is:

 
 
 
 

6. A Nevada Supreme Court decision extended shield‑law protection to a blogger by reasoning that:

 
 
 
 

7. Under Washington’s shield law, before compelling disclosure of news materials, the government must show, among other things, that the information is:

 
 
 
 

8. Reporters standing on a public sidewalk may lawfully photograph private property so long as they capture only:

 
 
 
 

9. Hidden‑camera recording is generally illegal in multi‑party consent states when:

 
 
 
 

10. In Branzburg v. Hayes (1972), the Supreme Court held that journalists:

 
 
 
 

11. Any government restriction on recording police must satisfy the time‑place‑manner test by being content‑neutral, narrowly tailored, and:

 
 
 
 

12. In a single‑party consent state, a phone conversation may be recorded legally when:

 
 
 
 

13. Third‑party subpoenas that seek phone or internet records to identify a reporter’s source are addressed in the PRESS Act by:

 
 
 
 

14. State statutes that protect journalists from compelled disclosure of sources are commonly called:

 
 
 
 

15. Federal appellate courts have generally recognized that recording police performing duties in public is protected by which constitutional amendment?

 
 
 
 

16. The Food Lion v. ABC litigation centered on which claims brought by the supermarket chain?

 
 
 
 

17. Entering private property to gather news without the owner’s permission most commonly exposes journalists to which tort claim?

 
 
 
 

18. The proposed federal PRESS Act would principally:

 
 
 
 

19. California’s 2021 law protecting journalists at protests primarily prohibits police from:

 
 
 
 

20. Multi‑party (or all‑party) consent wiretapping laws require:

 
 
 
 

Ideas for Future Study

  • Shield Laws and Digital Journalism: Should bloggers and independent journalists qualify for the same protections as traditional reporters?

  • Investigative Techniques: Are hidden cameras ethical or necessary in certain contexts?

  • Public Safety vs. Press Freedom: How should law enforcement balance protest control with press access?

  • Social Media and Privacy: Does scraping information from social platforms count as intrusion?

  • Case Study Debate: Revisit Food Lion v. ABC. Did the court get it right, or should public interest have outweighed the trespass?

Parting Thought

Should journalists be given more legal leeway than ordinary citizens when gathering news, or should they be held to the same standards as everyone else? How does the answer affect public trust in the press?