NYT: In Leak Cases, New WH Pressure on Journalists (espionage charges?)

[DeepModem Mom]

In Leak Cases, New Pressure on Journalists
By ADAM LIPTAK
Published: April 30, 2006

Earlier administrations have fired and prosecuted government officials who provided classified information to the press. They have also tried to force reporters to identify their sources.

But the Bush administration is exploring a more radical measure to protect information it says is vital to national security: the criminal prosecution of reporters under the espionage laws.

Such an approach would signal a thorough revision of the informal rules of engagement that have governed the relationship between the press and the government for many decades. Leaking in Washington is commonplace and typically entails tolerable risks for government officials and, at worst, the possibility of subpoenas to journalists seeking the identities of sources....

***

It is not easy to gauge whether the administration will move beyond these efforts to criminal prosecutions of reporters. In public statements and court papers, administration officials have said the law allows such prosecutions and that they will use their prosecutorial discretion in this area judiciously. But there is no indication that a decision to begin such a prosecution has been made. A Justice Department spokeswoman, Tasia Scolinos, declined to comment on Friday.

Because such prosecutions of reporters are unknown, they are widely thought inconceivable. But legal experts say that existing laws may well allow holding the press to account criminally. Should the administration pursue the matter, these experts say, it could gain a tool that would thoroughly alter the balance of power between the government and the press....

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/30/washington/30leak.html?hp&ex=1146456000&en=67c81f3c48cf2489&ei=5094&partner=homepage

[thecrow]

1. As if they haven't already

altered the balance of power between the government and the press....

[Kagemusha]

2. To state the obvious, the press' power is that the courts allow it.

And that's all.

Otherwise there is no "power". And talk of such power is silly. And the only reason that this is an issue is that Bush administration officials have done specific things to abuse the power of the press. But what's really stupid is that the point is, the risk is supposed to be borne by the leaker, and the journalist's obligation is to protect that leaker as much as possible. (Defending a leaker who has turned out later to have committed a grave felony violating national security shouldn't be seen as "possible". The courts have not, and never will, uphold a right to act in support of a criminal conspiracy by a credentialed journalist.)

The bottom line is, what are you going to sue the reporters for? Besides, the NY Times has consistently taken a deliberately mendacious position (re: the AIPAC lobbyist prosecution) to try and scare everyone off from pursuing lines of inquiry, even though the people being prosecuted there are emphatically not reporters, and did not publish the information they received like reporters. (Rather, that case involves taking information for passing it on to a foreign power, which is not quite as protected as the mainstream media would have us believe.)