[nasional_list] [ppiindia] Freedom of the Press: When Journalists Should Reveal Their Sources
- From: "Ambon" <sea@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <"Undisclosed-Recipient:;"@freelists.org>
- Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2006 03:35:33 +0200
** Forum Nasional Indonesia PPI India Mailing List **
** Untuk bergabung dg Milis Nasional kunjungi:
** Situs Milis: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ppiindia/ **
** Beasiswa dalam negeri dan luar negeri S1 S2 S3 dan post-doctoral
scholarship, kunjungi
http://informasi-beasiswa.blogspot.com
**http://editorials.netster.com/story.asp?id=20641
Freedom of the Press: When Journalists Should Reveal Their Sources
Author: Candida Bohnne-Eittreim
Journalists have always claimed the right to protect their sources from
exposure. One of the most notable cases was the Ellsburg Papers which led to
the Watergate Scandal. That particular story was covered by Bob Woodward and
Carl Bernstein, who tried to protect Daniel Ellsberg from disclosing how he
came into possession of certain documents. This scenario is common to
journalists who are investigating a major piece of ethical wrongdoing in
governmental affairs. But the question here is, When should a journalist reveal
sources, and under which circumstances?
Let's look at Judith Miller, deeply involved in the Valerie Plame case.
In this case. Ms. Miller had long been looked at with suspicion and disgust by
those convinced the Iraq War was an orchestrated event. Miller, who ultimately
was jailed 85 days for her refusal to disclose to Special Investigator Patrick
J. Fitzgerald her knowledge of the Plame affair and who she had spoken to about
it. Her employer, the N.Y.Times, had already aided her co-defendant Matthew
Cooper, who agreed to testify before the Grand Jury, thereby avoiding Miller's
fate.
The whole scandal, dubbed by some as Treasongate, involved the disclosure
of a C.I.A. operative's covert name and status. This leak cost an intelligent
and very able C.I.A. employee of long standing to lose her job, and live under
constant fear for the lives of her twin toddlers and herself. Tragically, Ms.
Plame herself, was only a tool used to punish her husband, former Ambassador
Joseph Wilson. Wilson had made enemies within the Administration, by his
disclosure that the alleged sale of yellowcake uranium to Iraq had never taken
place. After handing in an administrative report, and understanding after a
period of time that this report didn't suit the prevailing mindset, he went
public July 6, 2003, criticizing the Administration's stand in the N.Y. Times.
He followed this by an appearance on Meet The Press. Three days later, Ms.
Plame was outed publicly.
In the Ellsberg case, there was a definite and reasonable need for
Woodward and Bernstein to protect their source. The circumstances surrounding
the Watergate Scandal exposed definite misuse of Executive powers, and could
have endangered Ellsberg's life. In the second case, Valerie Plame wasn't
involved in anything germane to the leak, other than her being married to
Joseph Wilson.
The leaking of the information concerning N.S.A. use of wiretaps in
covert ops against foreign nationals within the U.S. is another example of
invoking journalistic privilege. The N.Y. Times sat on this story for one year,
allegedly at the behest of President Bush. Which is in many reasonable minds
pure nonsense. As of this point in time, the N.Y. Times has not offered any
other source for their information.
Are the above-mentioned cases examples of when a representative of the
media has gone too far in protecting sources? I believe they are. Special
Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald, wrote in response to N.Y. Times Chairman Arthur
Sulzberger Jr., in part:" that even though Time magazine surrendered Cooper's
notes in the case, the journalist's testimony is still needed in the
investigation.
"First, Cooper's own article noted that the conduct of the officials
involved an attack on an administration critic, not whistle-blowing,"
Fitzgerald wrote.
"Second, at a time when journalists seek a reporter's privilege akin to
the attorney-client privilege, they ought to recognize that an attorney can be
compelled to testify if his client communicates to the attorney for the purpose
of committing a crime or fraud. ... Third, journalists are not entitled to
promise complete confidentiality - no one in America is."
Here in a nutshell is the crux of the argument. Responsible journalists
protect sources who are whistleblowing, exposing corruption or otherwise
helping to better our society, by exposing corporate/governmental wrongdoings.
They cross the line when they help hide sources who have damaged or attacked
reputations for political reasons, participated in major crimes, or endangered
the nation's security by the disclosure of highly classified information. When
this occurs, it can come close to treason or at the very least aiding and
abetting of our nation's enemies.
The pen is mightier than the sword in a writer's hands. And that weapon
must be used with respect and care where it concerns the laws of the land and
the lives of others. Responsible and ethical journalists and commentators
understand this well. It is unfortunate that so many others don't understand
they are not above the law because of what they do.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Check out the new improvements in Yahoo! Groups email.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/6pRQfA/fOaOAA/yQLSAA/BRUplB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
***************************************************************************
Berdikusi dg Santun & Elegan, dg Semangat Persahabatan. Menuju Indonesia yg
Lebih Baik, in Commonality & Shared Destiny.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ppiindia
***************************************************************************
__________________________________________________________________________
Mohon Perhatian:
1. Harap tdk. memposting/reply yg menyinggung SARA (kecuali sbg otokritik)
2. Pesan yg akan direply harap dihapus, kecuali yg akan dikomentari.
3. Reading only, http://dear.to/ppi
4. Satu email perhari: ppiindia-digest@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
5. No-email/web only: ppiindia-nomail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
6. kembali menerima email: ppiindia-normal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ppiindia/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
ppiindia-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
** Forum Nasional Indonesia PPI India Mailing List **
** Untuk bergabung dg Milis Nasional kunjungi:
** Situs Milis: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ppiindia/ **
** Beasiswa dalam negeri dan luar negeri S1 S2 S3 dan post-doctoral
scholarship, kunjungi
http://informasi-beasiswa.blogspot.com **
Other related posts:
- » [nasional_list] [ppiindia] Freedom of the Press: When Journalists Should Reveal Their Sources
