Legality vs Morality

I'm in the final trimester of university and I have realised that I've heard, studied, presented and even practiced some form or the other on the laws we have learned since our very first trimester. Legalities have been put in place to protect as well as to punish offenders. However, one point from the readings that stayed in my mind was the line " while some legal principles may be pertinent, the facts of many hallmark historical cases are far removed from the practices of modern journalists and the likelihood of them ever applying to present- day journalism is slim" (Pearson, n.d: 199) Does this mean that present laws are still being used for present day cases in some way to some extent? If these 'older' rules have been used, then they form the basis of defamation suits, contempt of court etc. Newer forms of news reporting have emerged and although newer regulations have been put in accordingly, they are still based on older principles. Does this bring about loopholes in the system? And if so, are the 'journalism law' and 'shield law' for example enough to protect a journalist in present situations?

Journalists have a duty to report the the goings on to the mass public. Journalists also "have no rights beyond those of ordinary citizens" but they are given "some special privileges in order to facilitate their role in bringing information to the wider citizenry" (Pearson, n.d: 199) such as access to court documents and arrangement of better seating. Another privilege journalists are allowed is the ability to protect their sources. However, "Shield Law", as was discussed in tutorial does not encompass every aspect of the possibility of protecting a source. As Leong Ching mentioned in class, in the US, if your don't reveal your source, you're not in contempt of court. I feel that protecting your source matters but to what extent? Is this source's information pertinent to the court proceedings? Will someone be convicted? Will there be people who will affected gravely if this information is not disclosed? I've realised there is a fine line between the legal and moral dilemmas journalists fail, sometimes on a regular basis.