Here's a journalist who nearly "gets it"

[spooky3]

Kinsley (LA Times) is about the only journalist that seems to understand most of what David Zephyr and some other DUers have been trying to say about the Judith Miller story, rather than taking a shallow, self-interested (or worse) perspective.

snip

The noble principle for which Times reporter Judith Miller sits in jail is the right of journalists to participate in efforts to stifle dissent, censor free speech, abuse power and then cover it all up. No? Well, not exactly. Secret sources can be whistle-blowers themselves, helping anonymously to expose corruption. That is why journalists say that anonymous sources are essential to freedom and democracy. But that is not the current case, and it may not even be the case most of the time.

In a ringing and utterly uncompromising editorial Friday, the New York Times noted correctly that even its earlier editorials about the need to expose and punish "an egregious abuse of power" had warned against any "attempt to compel journalists to reveal their sources." But these directives are irreconcilable. The "egregious abuse of power" was leaking secret information to journalists. The leaker has a Fifth Amendment right not to testify. If journalists have a First Amendment right not to testify, then the "egregious abuse of power" cannot be exposed or punished.

This isn't about the press's right to publish information. It is about a right to keep information secret. Even the Times acknowledges that sometimes the government's right to secrecy is more important (wartime troop movements is its single, melodramatic example). And even the federal government recognizes the social utility of a vigorous press -- going out of its way to avoid demanding trial evidence from journalists in most circumstances. From this, it is easy enough to imagine a compromise, ideally reflected in a journalistic shield law like that in most states.

snip

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/08/AR2005070801692.html

[Pepperbelly]

1. Thanks for that catch ...

He's about got it right.

[Ilsa]

2. Excellent! Thanks for the link. n/t

[spooky3]

3. shameless kick

[cally]

4. Great editorial

My favorite paragraph:

The biggest problem in the way of a compromise is that journalists who share the philosophy of the Times assert the right to decide unilaterally. Even if they acknowledge the possibility that their needs don't always trump everybody else's, they insist that their judgment does trump everybody else's.