Can we draw the following hypothesis from the context? 

Context:

I interpret the order and the amended order to mean that Your Honor, in a sense, has addressed them as fact witnesses. I don't think you actually come out and use the word "fact witnesses," but as one reads the order, that's the implication. And you initially had indicated that you did not feel that the reporter's privilege stood in this kind of a case.

Hypothesis: The reporter's privilege was upheld by the judge because of the fact witnesses.
It's impossible to say