|
Judith Miller, The New York Times, and the Supreme Court
|
View this Thread in Original format
| tribu |
LINK
"A federal judge ordered New York Times reporter Judith Miller jailed for contempt of court Wednesday for refusing to testify to a grand jury investigating the leak of a CIA operative's name. She was taken into custody immediately."
What do you think? Was the right to a free press pervaded here or should those rights have limits? |
|
|
| CyberneticAngel |
| To me it doesn't matter whom the information hurts or protects. The high courts decsion to forse these reporters to reveal their sources is an absolute tragedy. If there is no legal protection for these journalist's when they are useing a hidden source they will stop using them. Do you think whistle blowers are more likely to come forward, or less as a result of this ruling? Take this particular story for example, if it where to happen again do you think that anyone in the White House would leak it? Absolutly not! with this ruling the court has ensured that government secrets will never be revealed to the press. I applaude Judith Miller for her determination and sincerly hope that no harm comes to her during her unjust imprisionment |
|
|
| Orbital32 |
| I think it's good. If information leaked broke the law then it should be turned over. This case it did... the source broke federal law of non-disclosure of national security. It's the sources fault for talking. I belive that this is truly justified. 1st amendment law is not protected by laws being broken....only incases of self-discrimnation. |
|
|
| igottaknow |
| I love it when bush propagandists errrr... I mean conservative journalist go to jail. :happy2: I wonder if she's going to get Martha Stewart's cell :stongue: |
|
|
| tribu |
| quote: | Originally posted by igottaknow
I love it when bush propagandists errrr... I mean conservative journalist go to jail. :happy2: I wonder if she's going to get Martha Stewart's cell :stongue: |
Judith Miller, er, I mean New York Times reporters are conservative? |
|
|
| Erotic Buddha |
| who cares its just another overrated crap story |
|
|
| tribu |
| quote: | Originally posted by Erotic Buddha
who cares its just another overrated crap story |
I disagree.
While Federal law was broken, I think reporters and their sources should always be covered. As someone else said, this will likely make reporters less likely to send stories to print and sources less likely to blow the whistle on power abusing corporations and governments. The law-breaker here is not the reporter, and she should not be punished for doing her job.
This is a potentially important freedom of the press issue (several of these have actually happened since 1980) and I think treating it apathetically is somewhat of a mistake. |
|
|
| igottaknow |
| quote: | Originally posted by tribu
Judith Miller, er, I mean New York Times reporters are conservative? |
contrary to bush's spin everyone in the media isn't liberal. :rolleyes: |
|
|
| tribu |
| quote: | Originally posted by igottaknow
contrary to bush's spin everyone in the media isn't liberal. :rolleyes: |
Yes, understood but the NYT is somewhat well known for it's liberal tendencies.
Ive never read her work, so I cant claim anything, but my understanding of the paper is that its editorializations are slowly moving left. After reviewing the article, it sounds like the story could serve left or right wing interests, and not having read the article, I can't comment.
Alot of the media, however, is liberal. Not all, but a good portion. For quite awhile, left-leaning media was good business (and still really is). |
|
|
| Orbital32 |
| quote: | Originally posted by tribu
The law-breaker here is not the reporter, and she should not be punished for doing her job.
|
Ahhh but you see they are...that's why they are going to jail. They are not getting charged for any national security violations, they are getting charged for not obeying an order, ie: contempt of court.
throw them the book! |
|
|
| igottaknow |
| quote: | Originally posted by tribu
Yes, understood but the NYT is somewhat well known for it's liberal tendencies.
Ive never read her work, so I cant claim anything, but my understanding of the paper is that its editorializations are slowly moving left. After reviewing the article, it sounds like the story could serve left or right wing interests, and not having read the article, I can't comment.
Alot of the media, however, is liberal. Not all, but a good portion. For quite awhile, left-leaning media was good business (and still really is). |
For quite a while the media has been moving away from being "liberal" and for the most part it serves the interests of big business because its owned by big business. Many of them had to appologize, including the NYT for not challenging the government's assertion that Saddam had WMDs. The media job is to be critical of whoever is in power and since the republicans are in now the media is "liberal". I don't remember conservatives complaining about liberal bias when the media was roasting Clinton.
Is the media liberal because they don't follow along in lock step with the bush administration? Anyways in the New York Times case a conservative editor put Miller on the WMD story where she used government sources without verifying the validity of their story that Saddam had WMDs. Miller seems very close to the bush administration and likes to use them as her sources, so its not surprising with the Novak debacle she unwilling to reveal anything. Since Bush rewards team players I'm sure Miller won't be spending much time in jail. |
|
|
| DJ RJT |
| The conflict inside me RE: this story is as vast as the sea of tranquility... |
|
|
|
|
