If a press member gets paid by a political campaign to perform in their favor have they become an agent of that campaign and in doing so nullified their constitutional protection? If this is true, then their sources of leaked information would not be protected from identity disclosure.
I think insight is making a stretch. It doesn’t seem like a “direct” payment.
However, most are media “contributors” who happen to have businesses that did business with and got paid by Hillary’s campaign.
It sure seemed like a lot of them. I never chased any of this further.