The House this week overwhelmingly passed legislation protecting reporters and their sources, and we urge the Senate to do the same.

The Free Flow of Information Act would bring federal protection of confidential sources, meaning reporters could not be compelled to reveal who gave them information.

Reporters could still be ordered to disclose sources if the information was deemed necessary to stop act an act of terrorism, for example, but would protect most news sources from being publicly revealed.

Here at The Citizen, anonymous sources are used extremely rarely.

To be able to trust us - and the accuracy of the information we provide - the public needs to be able to know where the information came from, and thereby be able to decide for themselves whether or not the source is reliable.

But with controversial topics of national or global significance (secret CIA prisons and shoddy conditions at Walter Reed Medical Center are two recent examples) there is sometimes no other way to get the information to the public than by promising a source that he or she will never be named.

There have been more than 40 instances in recent years where reporters were asked to reveal sources or testify in federal cases.

Reporters who refuse to name names are sometimes sent to jail.

This new bill makes sense because it is not a complete blanket of protection, taking into account cases where a person may be in imminent danger; where national security might be compromised; or where the information might lead to the arrest of someone who committed an act of terrorism.

What the law will provide is an atmosphere where people are more willing to disclose what they know without fear of going to jail or losing their job or losing their life.

The ultimate benefactors are the American public, who require a free flow of information to keep them informed - and to help keep their elected officials more honest.