A flaw in the proposed federal shield law for journalism?

[Commentary] The media shield bill that frequently seems poised to whisk through Congress, but has incurred several discomfiting delays, is a bad idea unless it gets one big change. If the story goes to trial, the judge should have the discretion to disallow the confidentiality protection of the sources if the reporter has made any significant errors or if the sources' information is wrong or unfair. If the reporter has screwed up or been dishonest or been suckered, why should he/she be protected? Without this change, the law is a bad idea for the public because the rights of the subjects of the stories and possibly others affected are totally ignored. And it might be a bad idea for the press itself because one can easily foresee it backfiring during a libel trial that centers on wrong and harmful information.