Why this journalist thinks that Judy Miller should go to jail

[TacticalPeek]

Why this journalist thinks that Judy Miller should go to jail

snip

Indeed, as recently as a few days, we didn't want to see Judy Miller of the New York Times (or Time's Matt Cooper, whose case turned out quite differently) sent to jail. But frankly, our reasoning was pretty much along the same lines that the NRA uses to make hideous arguments to allow assault rifles or cop-killer bullets -- the "slippery slope" argument.

So what if the "source" that Miller (and Cooper) have been protecting may have committed a serious crime, naming an undercover CIA agent and possibly even exposing her to fatal consequences, as happened when American spies were "outed" in the 1970s. In the "slippery slope" argument, those facts are irrelevant. If Judy Miller goes to jail today, under this thinking, it makes it more likely for a good and honest journalist who's on the brink of exposing true corruption to be jailed tomorrow.

Today, we realized that the "slippery slope" argument is wrong, and so were we. We're not happy that Judy Miller is going to jail, but we think -- in this case -- that if she won't cooperate with the grand jury, then it's the right thing.

That's because Judy Miller's actions in recent years -- a pattern that includes this case -- have been the very antithesis of what we think journalism is and should be all about. Ultimately, the heart and soul of real journalism is not so much protecting "sources" at any cost. It is, rather, living up to the 19th Century maxim set forth by Peter Finley Dunne, that journalists should comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable.

snip

But the Times' Judy Miller has not been afflicting the comfortable. She has been protecting them, advancing their objectives, and helping them to mislead a now very afflicted American public. In fact, thinking again about Watergate and Deep Throat is a good way to understand why Judy Miller should not be protected today. Because in Watergate, a reporter acting like Miller would not be meeting the FBI's Mark Felt in an underground parking garage. She would be obsessively on the phone with H.R. Haldeman or John Dean, listening to bad gossip about Carl Bernstein or their plans to make Judge Sirica look bad.

http://www.pnionline.com/dnblog/attytood/archives/002161.html


Great article!

[Neerav B. Trivedi]

1. She is covering up the crime from Rove and the White House,

As mentioned in the DU forum many times.

She should go to jail until she speaks the truth about this corruption by Rove and the Bush White House.

[wurzel]

2. Kudos to George Stephanopolis

for pointing out on ABC news that Miller was not going to jail to protect a whistleblower, but was involed in dishing political dirt.

[BeyondGeography]

3. Maybe this is a perverse claim to credibility

Like all of us, I was appalled by her performance as a journalist-cum-court stenographer in the run-up to the Iraq war. She took quite a public pounding for that as well as internally at the Times. She might feel that this star turn as First Amendment martyr will elevate her professional standing. Whatever the case, the profession couldn't have a more unappealing standard bearer.

[DisassemblingHisLies]

4. Excellent! In other words, it's a matter of who the journalist serves.

The Fourth Estate exists no more, although I'd like to think situations such as this will cause a renewal of ethical journalistic priorities.

This case holds a mirror up to the media's face. There should be no cushy relationship between journalists & the White House, nor should the White House pay journalists for reporting false, misleading, or slanted information.

I hope this is one of Fitzgerald's area of concern.