Link
Two reporters got the name of an undercover CIA operative. Now they are facing charges because they refuse to reveal their source.
The lawyer for the reporters say that "Today's decision strikes a heavy blow against the public's right to be informed about its government," Abrams said in a statement."
But what right did they have to possibly compromise our nation's security?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
2 comments:
As a person somewhat familiar with media law, I find this interesting. I think, at times, it is admirable for a journalist to protect their sources, but this is a case when there needs to be a reality check! You don't get so caught up in the circumstance that you fail to get the big picture. This is an issue of national security and these journalist need to wake up and smell the coffee.
Maybe the more dangerous precedent is to allow Karl Rove and people like him to use underhanded tacitics like in this case. Many believe he was the one who leaked the identity of the Ambassador's wife because the Ambassador would not tow-the-line with the administration.
Post a Comment