Her case has been interesting to follow. The principal she went to jail for is, in most cases, very noble. In traditional circumstances, the member of the press is using the power of the pen to drag evil into the light. When we consider this we think of Woodward & Bernstein. Protecting a source from retribution who has, or is still, exposing a crime.
The informant is trying to take action for the good of society, and to correct a hidden wrong. Their motivations may not always be the best, but the end result should be a crime exposed, and those who were vital to this discovery protected.
Mrs. Miller's case is a little different.
She was trying to protect someone who committed a crime. It just doesn't ring with the same nobility. Many of those working in her industry supported her effort to hide a criminal, or at least paid her effort lip service, but the principal she tried to hide behind didn't really seem to fit the facts of this case.
It is time the whole truth be told, and those responsible for outing a covert CIA agent be held responsible for their actions.
Dan Froomkin reinforces this this point.
Note to reporters: There is nothing intrinsically noble about keeping your sources' secrets. Your job, in fact, is to expose them. And if a very senior government official, after telling you something in confidence, then tells you that you don't have to keep it secret anymore, the proper response is "Hooray, now I can tell the world"
No comments:
Post a Comment