Whistle-blowers are great. We wouldn't find out certain things without them. Good reporters rely on them like cops rely on 'snitchs' and they should be protected. But Rove and Libby aren't whistle-blowers...
by Frances Cerra Whittelsey
"So now we know for sure. Those "highly placed Bush Administration sources" anonymously quoted over and over again in front-page and cover stories are, in fact, the likes of Karl Rove and Lewis Libby. The Valerie Plame affair has not only outed the chronic propaganda leakers in the Bush Administration; it has also exposed for the public to see the corrupt relationship between the White House and leading members of the national press corps.
Why corrupt? Because one of the first things journalists learn is that their job is to put sources on record, by name. They are warned that sources giving background and off-the-record information may well be floating trial balloons, or worse, pushing propaganda designed to build public support for war or any other part of an administration's agenda. What should we think of reporters who, instead, see their jobs as regularly conveying anonymously the whispers of the people closest to the President of the United States? And how should we judge the news outlets that reward those reporters regularly by placing their "exclusive" stories on their front pages?
The reporters I respect (and such has been my own practice as a reporter) usually grant anonymity only to sources who are taking a personal risk in conveying truth that discomfits people in power. Such is not the case with Judith Miller or Matt Cooper or any of the other reporters who regularly turn to a Rove or a Libby."
http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20050815&s=whittelsey
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore