IV. Who is covered

California's reporter's privilege explicitly protects (1) "[a] publisher, editor, reporter, or other person connected with or employed upon a newspaper, magazine, or other periodical publication or by a press association or wire service, or any person who has been so connected or employed" and (2) "a radio or television news reporter or other person connected with or employed by a radio or television station, or any person who has been so connected or employed." Cal. Const. art. I, § 2(b). Consequently, it is unclear whether it protects other types of journalists, such as book authors. No California case has addressed this issue.

However, the courts generally have been liberal in defining these terms, for example, by including freelance reporters in the protection of the privilege. E.g., Von Villas, supra, 10 Cal. App. 4th at 231-32; Playboy Enterprises, supra, 154 Cal. App. 3d at 28-29. California courts also have extended the privilege to bloggers engaged in the gathering and dissemination of news. O’Grady, supra, 139 Cal. App. 4th at 1457. One Court of Appeal held that to be entitled to protection, "the person or entity invoking the shield law [must] be engaged in legitimate journalistic purposes, or have exercised judgmental discretion in such activities." Rancho Publications v. Superior Court, 68 Cal. App. 4th 1538, 1544-45 (1999) (citing Delaney, supra, 50 Cal. 3d at 798 n.8.) Consequently, this case requires "a prima facie showing" that the information was obtained "for the journalistic purpose of communicating information to the public." Id. at 1546. Another Court of Appeal asserted that the reporter's burden is "to show that they were in a class of persons protected by the shield law and that the information provided by their source was 'procured … for news or news commentary purposes on radio or television.'" In re Willon, supra, 47 Cal. App. 4th at 1092-93 (1996) (citations omitted).