Two recent decisions afford contrasting examples of the operation of section 10 of the Contempt of Court Act 1981, which grants a writer or publisher a limited privilege to withhold the source of published information. The privilege acknowledges the importance of maintaining the flow of information to the public about matters of legitimate public concern, a process which may depend on a journalist's ability to keep a promise of anonymity or non-attributability made to his source. The privilege is lost, however, where it is “established to the satisfaction of the court that disclosure is necessary in the interests of justice or national security or for the prevention of disorder or crime”. Since these exceptions are widely stated and reflect public interests of (potentially) equal importance with the flow of information to the press, the application of section 10 inevitably depends on the court's assessment of the comparative weight of the conflicting interests in the circumstances of the particular case.