Because the shield law protects only unpublished information and the identity of sources, information that has been "published" may not be protected by the shield law. No reported California decision has found the privilege to have been waived as a result of the reporter's disclosure of unpublished information. However, some cases have suggested that waiver might be found. For example, in Rosato, supra, the dissenting opinion asserted that
To protect the privilege the newsman must avoid answering any questions which might result in an actual or constructive waiver of the privilege. By voluntarily answering questions as to some facts which would lead to the source, he will be held to have waived the privilege as to all other facts connected therewith.
51 Cal. App. 3d at 233 (citations omitted). The dissent mentioned Farr, supra, as a "clear example of such a waiver," asserting that "by admitting that he had received the information from three persons subject to the court's order, Farr impliedly waived his right not to disclose their identities." Id. (discussing Farr, supra, 22 Cal. App. 3d at 70). However, because the Farr court did not explicitly evaluate any claim of waiver, it does not provide any basis for this argument.