| Sign in: |
| Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features. |
|
|
|
|
|| SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board
Journalist's Privilege??
Lucas Jackson, Student/Intern
 |
Ventura | CA | USA | Posted: 1:30 PM on 02.16.05 |
->> The New York Times reporter and Time magazine reporter who leaked Plame's identity as a CIA agent are being subpoenad to divulge their source.
http://www.forbes.com/business/services/2005/02/16/cx_da_0216topnews.html
Should a journalist be required to divulge the subject/source of their work or should they be allowed to keep it under wraps? I think that if journalists had a constitutional right to not divulge their source/subject if they did not have to then we could see some amazing work done on previously inaccesible subjects that could do a lot of good. But thats just me. |
|
Lucas Jackson, Student/Intern
|
Ventura | CA | USA | Posted: 1:58 PM on 02.16.05 |
| ->> I need to start editing my posts before I hit the send button, the english in this previous one is atrocious. My apologies, why is there no 'edit' function??? |
|
Juliann Tallino, Photographer
 |
Los Angeles | CA | usa | Posted: 2:10 PM on 02.16.05 |
| ->> Actually Lucas there is an edit function. After you hit the "post comments" button your post comes up looking like it would if published. You can either hit the "Publish this Message" button or edit your comments in the box below. |
|
Joe Nicola, Photographer
 |
Fort Worth | TX | USA | Posted: 4:11 PM on 02.16.05 |
->> Lucas,
I have a question for you on that subject. What about when a journalist publishes the name of an agent working in a foreign country and the agent is subsequently murdered because of his relationship to "the agency"?
I know that many will argue that a journalist is protected even when it gets ugly and printing the name of an agent seems to justify their actions under the premise of "the public has a right to know," even if the journalist's actions result in an agent's death.
I don't think this is right and it is under these circumstances that I think they should have to spill the beans, but then, apparently, what do I know? But then, why does the public need to know that John Doe is the station chief in Athens, Greece????
What's kinda funny in my mind is that people--even people here--will doggedly defend their right to print the names of people or information that "the public has a right to know," yet they won't tell you how much money they make because "that's a private matter."
How is that different? |
|
Jason Grow, Photographer
|
Gloucester | MA | USA | Posted: 4:29 PM on 02.16.05 |
| ->> Regardless of whether there's a privilege in maintaining source confidentiality, it's my understanding that it's a federal crime to reveal the identity of a working undercover operative.... that's the reason they want to know the source... |
|
Max Whittaker, Photographer
|
Yuba City (Sacramento) | CA | USA | Posted: 4:57 PM on 02.16.05 |
->> Joe,
I think you're mixing up two seperate issues.
As far as I know, Judith Miller of the New York Times, and Matthew Cooper of Time never revealed the identity of a covert agent. Miller never even wrote about it at all. Syndicated columnist Robert Novak was the one to "out" the agent.
From today's NYTimes: "It is not known whether Mr. Novak has received a subpeona or, if he did, how he responded. His lawyer, James Hamilton, declined to comment..."
Miller and Cooper are merely trying to protect their sources, NOT their right to print the names of covert CIA officers. |
|
Robert Caplin, Student/Intern, Photographer
 |
Athens | OH | USA | Posted: 5:13 PM on 02.16.05 |
->> The common-law doctrine of “privilege” provides exceptions: husband-wife; lawyer-client; priest-penitent; doctor-patient; government informant-source.
The fact of the matter is that there is no exemption between journalist and their sources.
Should journalists who get confidential information from sources enjoy the same immunity from disclosure? Should they have a right to protect the identity of their sources? How about out-takes or Notes??....maybe....there's a big gray area.
Throughout the years there have been many cases that have narrowed that gray area....
Branzburg v. Hayes, 1972:
3 reporters were subpoenaed by grand juries to testify about alleged criminal conduct they had witnessed. All 3 refused to testify and were found in contempt of court. Paul Branzburg, a reporter for the Louisville Courier-Journal, was called to testify before a grand jury about drug use in Kentucky after he wrote articles about drugs and drug dealers. He refused, was cited for contempt of court, and appealed all the way to the US Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court held that under certain conditions, reporters must testify as to the crimes they have seen, but not as to anything else. Also they decided there is no privilege under the First Amendment for journalists to refuse to reveal the names of confidential sources when called to testify by a grand jury.
It was a close one as it was a 5-4 decision. In Justice Stewart's dessent he came up with a test form regarding court's use of privilege:
1. Is there probable cause to believe the journalist has information that is clearly relevant to a probable crime?
2. Are there no alternative means of obtaining the information that would be less destructive of First Amendment values?
3. Is there a compelling and overriding interest in the information?
Since that "form" was made, states have been using those analogies to enact "shield laws" trying to protect journalists.
The interesting thing is that a reporter's confidentiality agreement with a source IS a legally binding contract. (Based on Cohen v. Cowles Media case in 1991.) BUT the 1st Amendment does NOT give the reporter the right to break that contract without being punished.
This just shows the amount of "gray" in the whole journalist "privilege" debacle.
-If journalists break their confidentiality agreement, they can be sued by their sources, fired by their paper, and/or become outcasts by their industry of peers for breech of their “journalistic ethical duties.”
-If journalists don’t give the court the information or names of sources they can be jailed.
-If journalists begin to break their confidentially agreements and adhere to the court orders, will sources ever come forward again? That would be a problem….
It’s a messy situation...
Food for thought.
Robert |
|
Steven E. Frischling, Photographer
 |
New England | | USA | Posted: 6:05 PM on 02.16.05 |
->> Joe
I am pretty sure that IRS tax information can be requested under the Freedom of Information Act. If you are so inclined talk to my clients see if they will give you my SSN or EIN, then contact the IRS with a FOI Request and ask for a copy of my 2004 tax info. It is your right to be able to access the info and then publish it if you so desire. |
|
Joe Nicola, Photographer
|
Fort Worth | TX | USA | Posted: 8:20 PM on 02.16.05 |
->> Max,
You're probably right. Thanks for clearing that up. 'Course, after I posted, I went downstairs to eat some lunch/dinner and read the story in the paper. Figures. |
|
Mark Loundy, Photo Editor
 |
San Jose | CA | USA | Posted: 3:34 AM on 02.17.05 |
->> Robert, A number of states (including California) have statutory protections to protect journalists from being compelled to reveal confidential sources.
--Mark |
|
|| Sponsor Special Deals
We BUY & TRADE you OLD Gear
|
Available from:
Adorama Camera
|
Price: $0.00 |
Notes:
We all have some cameras & lenses sitting around collecting dust right?...Or you work at a Newspaper that has downsized?...What to do with your excess photographic equipment? Adorama's Used Dept is looking for your used gear to purchase or take in trade. Contact me directly jsnyder@adorama.com or 1-800-223-2500 X2435 and I can fill you in on the details. Cash in your pocket is better than sitting on the shelf, right?
|
|
-- More Info -- |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|