The chase to find "leakers" and it's chilling effect on MSM
from 
JoeUser Forums
JoeUser Forums
The following article underscores a huge unintended consequence of the hunt for the Valerie Plame leaker. Comments follow article snippet. Headline is linked. (From New York Times)
Newspaper Withholding Two Articles After Jailing
By ROBERT D. McFADDEN
Published: July 9, 2005
The editor of The Cleveland Plain Dealer said last night that the newspaper, acting on the advice of its lawyers, was withholding publication of two major investigative articles because they were based on illegally leaked documents and could lead to penalties against the paper and the jailing of reporters.
The editor, Doug Clifton, said lawyers for The Plain Dealer had concluded that the newspaper, Ohio's largest daily, would probably be found culpable if the authorities were to investigate the leaks and that reporters might be forced to identify confidential sources to a grand jury or go to jail.
"Basically, we have come by material leaked to us that would be problematical for the person who leaked it," Mr. Clifton said in a telephone interview. "The material was under seal or something along those lines."
In an earlier interview with the trade journal Editor & Publisher, which published an article on its Web site late yesterday, Mr. Clifton said that lawyers for The Plain Dealer and its owner, Newhouse Newspapers, had strongly recommended against publication of the articles.
"They've said, This is a super, super high-risk endeavor and you would, you know, you'd lose," Mr. Clifton told Editor & Publisher. "The reporters say, 'Well, we're willing to go to jail,' and I'm willing to go to jail if it gets laid on me, but the newspaper isn't willing to go to jail."
... more at linked article
So we start to see the chilling effect that the "hunt for Karl Rove", ooops, I mean the hunt for the leaker in the Valerie Plame case has on the press in this country.
Look, I'm no huge fan of the "MSM" (Main Stream Media). Read through past articles and comments in others postings and you could figure that out (though I'm known to clip from articles in order to add comments on current events, politics and other issues -- mainly to help prove a point or provide background on the issues I want to comment on).
With that said, we see from the article above just what we wind up with if we start and/or continue down the witch hunt path in an effort to "find leakers."
Please don't read me wrong -- whoever leaked the information about Valerie Plame should be found and punished, and I remain someone that hates having government employees and others take the "whistleblower" tact. If you have a problem with something that is going on, it should be resolved via official channels. If that truly doesn't work, then perhaps it is necessary to go the whistleblower or leaker route, but in many, many cases the leaker/whistleblower goes running to the press before ever considering going to an "internal affairs" or "inspector general" type group that is available to them. Rather than waiting for things to be addressed internally, people want immediate satisfaction, and immediate change, so they tattle to the press, who then has to go put together a story via multiple credible sources.
There have been times when news organizations get it badly wrong -- for example, the New York Times, CBS News and others in their attempts to tar and feather George W. Bush on the National Guard issue and others.
But what happens if there is an issue of national importance, or extreme local importance and a news outlet gets the information on wrong doing or corruption that affects the issue? If the issue is vitally important, should the news outlet sit on the story for fear that they can't protect their sources thanks to the decisions that are letting the New York Times reporters in the Plame case sit rotting in jail?
It could be happening in the case in the article above, and yet worries about protecting the news outlet from the reach of the judiciary have come in to stop the Cleveland Plain Dealer from publishing their article.
Yup, don't you just love a free press?
Newspaper Withholding Two Articles After Jailing
By ROBERT D. McFADDEN
Published: July 9, 2005
The editor of The Cleveland Plain Dealer said last night that the newspaper, acting on the advice of its lawyers, was withholding publication of two major investigative articles because they were based on illegally leaked documents and could lead to penalties against the paper and the jailing of reporters.
The editor, Doug Clifton, said lawyers for The Plain Dealer had concluded that the newspaper, Ohio's largest daily, would probably be found culpable if the authorities were to investigate the leaks and that reporters might be forced to identify confidential sources to a grand jury or go to jail.
"Basically, we have come by material leaked to us that would be problematical for the person who leaked it," Mr. Clifton said in a telephone interview. "The material was under seal or something along those lines."
In an earlier interview with the trade journal Editor & Publisher, which published an article on its Web site late yesterday, Mr. Clifton said that lawyers for The Plain Dealer and its owner, Newhouse Newspapers, had strongly recommended against publication of the articles.
"They've said, This is a super, super high-risk endeavor and you would, you know, you'd lose," Mr. Clifton told Editor & Publisher. "The reporters say, 'Well, we're willing to go to jail,' and I'm willing to go to jail if it gets laid on me, but the newspaper isn't willing to go to jail."
... more at linked article
So we start to see the chilling effect that the "hunt for Karl Rove", ooops, I mean the hunt for the leaker in the Valerie Plame case has on the press in this country.
Look, I'm no huge fan of the "MSM" (Main Stream Media). Read through past articles and comments in others postings and you could figure that out (though I'm known to clip from articles in order to add comments on current events, politics and other issues -- mainly to help prove a point or provide background on the issues I want to comment on).
With that said, we see from the article above just what we wind up with if we start and/or continue down the witch hunt path in an effort to "find leakers."
Please don't read me wrong -- whoever leaked the information about Valerie Plame should be found and punished, and I remain someone that hates having government employees and others take the "whistleblower" tact. If you have a problem with something that is going on, it should be resolved via official channels. If that truly doesn't work, then perhaps it is necessary to go the whistleblower or leaker route, but in many, many cases the leaker/whistleblower goes running to the press before ever considering going to an "internal affairs" or "inspector general" type group that is available to them. Rather than waiting for things to be addressed internally, people want immediate satisfaction, and immediate change, so they tattle to the press, who then has to go put together a story via multiple credible sources.
There have been times when news organizations get it badly wrong -- for example, the New York Times, CBS News and others in their attempts to tar and feather George W. Bush on the National Guard issue and others.
But what happens if there is an issue of national importance, or extreme local importance and a news outlet gets the information on wrong doing or corruption that affects the issue? If the issue is vitally important, should the news outlet sit on the story for fear that they can't protect their sources thanks to the decisions that are letting the New York Times reporters in the Plame case sit rotting in jail?
It could be happening in the case in the article above, and yet worries about protecting the news outlet from the reach of the judiciary have come in to stop the Cleveland Plain Dealer from publishing their article.
Yup, don't you just love a free press?