Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Should reporters be protected from revealing their sources?

Collapse

300x250 Mobile

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Bowles
    replied
    If the source committed a crime by revealing the information, or if as a result of the information others are being charged with a crime, I say yes they should be forced to identify their source.

    Leave a comment:


  • Centurion44
    replied
    Isn't ironic that if you accuse me of stalking you and I'm arrested for it, I have a legal right to know who you are.

    But if you tell a reporter I like to have sex with wild animals and it makes the news, all of a sudden you're "protected"?

    Leave a comment:


  • equinox137
    replied
    Originally posted by Stan Switek
    As a general rule, I support reporters protecting their sources. However, in this case an operational CIA agent was identified. Completely unacceptable. I can't support this in matters of national security.
    Only problem is that Plame was not an "operative" - she was an analyst that was pulled out of the field long before this happened.

    Leave a comment:


  • premium
    replied
    The way I see it is the actual crime being committed was that the identity/confidential material were revealed to the press. In other words the press them self played a role in the direct crime which was being investigated.

    Even the fact that Judith Miller did not write a story on the matter does not keep it from becoming an offense. The offense was the communication to an outsider without clearance not the story itself. Furthermore if she did not report the story then she can not claim to be a journalist. You can't have it both ways.

    In that regards it is very different then a journalist simply reporting a crime and knowing the source to be a criminal. In that case the direct crime would be separate from the communication with the reporter. It is not illegal to communicate with a criminal nor is it illegal to not report a criminal act to the authorities.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bighead
    replied
    One Question: Are you protected from revealing your sources?

    Leave a comment:


  • Stonie
    replied
    In this case, the reporter is in lockup until the grand jury's investigation is complete.

    Leave a comment:


  • The Don
    replied
    How long can a judge,State or Federal sentence someone for contempe of court for not revealing their sources,or refusing to answer the Judges Question,and will the person serve the sentence in county lockup or federal lockup?????????

    Leave a comment:


  • Stonie
    replied
    A new twist on the case ... Rove says he found out about Plame from the reporters.

    So um, where did the reporters get their info about Plame, then? I doubt they had the proper security clearance to find out themselves.

    Leave a comment:


  • retired
    replied
    The SC has already ruled that reporters do not have a 1st amendment right not to testify before a Grand Jury.

    Branzburg Vs Hayes 1972.

    The Court found that requiring reporters to disclose confidential information to grand juries served a "compelling" and "paramount" state interest and did not violate the First Amendment. Justice White argued that since the case involved no government intervention to impose prior restraint, and no command to publish sources or to disclose them indiscriminately, there was no Constitutional violation. The fact that reporters receive information from sources in confidence does not privilege them to withhold that information during a government investigation; the average citizen is often forced to disclose information received in confidence when summoned to testify in court.

    Leave a comment:


  • OFK
    replied
    "Real" reporters, who have real journalistic integrity have a right to have their "reliable" sources kept confidential however most reporters are total whores and have a huge agenda. The line has been blurred and in the land of fake info, it's rather difficult to want to or be able to protect the source.

    Leave a comment:


  • CarCop
    replied
    Great point Delta.

    If a federal "law" is passed then where does it end?.. Let's change the BTK case around a bit. The BTK killer used the media to exploit his murders. What if a reporter doing a story on the killer was getting info from the killer himself. Do you keep it as a confidential source or do you tell the cops? Hey it's a confidential source!!! I know it's a stretch but how long 'til we get to that point.

    A crime is a crime and should not be protected as some reporters source. Like Bowles said they should have an obligation to report it, if not legally at least morally. If a reporter chooses to keep it "secret" than don't publish it. If they do and end up going to jail to protect their source then shut the hell up and sit in jail, it was their choice.

    Leave a comment:


  • Delta784
    replied
    Originally posted by chiefhuntr
    Maby with cops, but to the news guy? I think not. If you dont want people to know you told on them, dont tell the newspaper... Call the police.
    Why should a reporter be absolved of all blame when they knowingly release information that they know is damaging to national security?

    Leave a comment:


  • Bowles
    replied
    IMO, anyone, reporter, doctor, clergy etc. who has knowledge that someone has committed a crime has an obligation to report it, including how they came to have this information and from who it was obtained.

    Leave a comment:


  • Runnin' 87
    replied
    If reports can not be caused to reveal their sources. What is there to prevent the reporter from claiming to have a souce, that in relaity does not exist?

    Leave a comment:


  • chiefhuntr
    replied
    What

    Originally posted by Delta784
    Confidential sources should always be protected. If some information is revealed to a reporter that is potentially damaging to national security or could endanger someone's safety, IMO it's up to the reporter to not publish it.

    Maby with cops, but to the news guy? I think not. If you dont want people to know you told on them, dont tell the newspaper... Call the police.

    Leave a comment:

MR300x250 Tablet

Collapse

What's Going On

Collapse

There are currently 2657 users online. 180 members and 2477 guests.

Most users ever online was 158,966 at 04:57 AM on 01-16-2021.

Welcome Ad

Collapse
Working...
X