Boston — Newspaper executives and press‑freedom advocates told the Joint Committee on the Judiciary that Massachusetts is one of a small number of states without a statutory reporter shield and that absence of a clear law harms journalism and public interest reporting.

Dan Krockmalnick, chief operating officer and general counsel of Boston Globe Media and president of the Massachusetts Newspaper Publishers Association, said the Globe and other local publishers have repeatedly spent legal fees defending reporter sources and material. "It's past time for Massachusetts to catch up with the rest of the country and enact this important and overdue legislation," he said.

Walter Robinson, editor at large at The Boston Globe and former Spotlight team leader, recalled investigative reporting on clergy abuse that depended on confidential sources and said sources will be deterred from speaking without statutory protection. Publishers and legal experts described multi‑thousand‑dollar legal battles to quash subpoenas and said smaller local newsrooms lack the resources to defend sources.

Legal advocates from the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press and the New England First Amendment Coalition urged a limited shield statute that balances government investigatory needs against the public interest. Jonathan Albano and Gabe Rotman outlined court rulings that produced inconsistent protections under common law and argued statutory standards would reduce costly litigation and inconsistent results across judges.

Ending: The committee did not vote. Witnesses asked the committee to draft a statute with defined tests and exceptions for serious crimes; lawmakers said they would consider language and stakeholder feedback.