Media Review Conduct After Leak

[kskiska]

CIA Inquiry Leads to Questions About What Should Be Published

By Howard Kurtz

When syndicated columnist Robert Novak reported on July 14 that "two senior administration officials" had told him that the wife of a prominent White House critic did undercover work for the CIA, it barely caused a ripple.

Former U.S. ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV talked about the leak in interviews and at the National Press Club soon after, telling Newsday the message was "that if you talk, we'll take your family and drag them through the mud." Nation writer David Corn called the leak a "thuggish act," and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman called it a "criminal act." After Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) called for an investigation, the New York Times, Washington Post and Buffalo News ran inside-the-paper stories.

But it was not until this weekend's reports that the CIA has asked the Justice Department to examine the matter that the story hit the front page of The Washington Post and the Sunday talk shows, sparking questions not just about White House motives but about media conduct.

(snip)

Tom Rosenstiel, director of the Project for Excellence in Journalism, said Novak was in "dangerous territory. . . . Journalists should apply a civil disobedience test: Does the public good outweigh the wrong that you're doing? In a case where you are risking someone's life, potentially, or putting someone in danger, you have to decide what is the public good you are accomplishing. Because you have the freedom to publish doesn't mean it's necessarily the right thing to do."

more…
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A14399-2003Sep28.html

[Bucky]

1. Novak should consider the ethical implications of what he writes?

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

[papau]

17. ABCNote suggests some great questions for media to ask

From the ABCnote:

"Has President Bush made clear to the White House staff that only total cooperation with the investigation will be tolerated? If not, why not?

Has he insisted that every senior staff member sign a statement with legal authority that they are not the leaker and that they will identify to the White House legal counsel who is?

Has Bush required that all sign a letter relinquishing journalists from protecting those two sources? Has Bush said that those involved in this crime will be immediately fired? If not, why not?

Has Albert Gonzalez distributed a letter to White House employees telling them to preserve documents, logs, records? If not, why not?

Has Andy Card named someone on his staff to organize compliance? If not, why not?

White House officials who might have legal or political exposure on this are going to have to decide whether to hire lawyers or not, and the White House counsel's office is going to have to decide what legal help they can and should provide to officials if and when the DOJ wants to talk to them.

That means that the '90s practice of every Washington bureau of calling members of the bar to see who has hired whom is about to heat back up. The first one to report someone hiring a criminal lawyer wins a prize, as does the first person who develops that lawyer as a source on all this.

A reminder that students of recusal politics will have to consider the Rove-Ashcroft history"

[Beetwasher]

2. This Is Encouraging, but Howie's Whoredom Shines Through

The fact that he's paying it attention and putting it in it's criminal light is great, however, the slant is suspect...

[Cha]

3. That's right ...I hadn't thought of this...

"The Wilson case has parallels in Britain, where Prime Minister Tony Blair has plummeted in popularity after his aides leaked the name of a BBC source, government scientist David Kelley, who had questioned Blair's evidence on Iraqi weapons. Kelley committed suicide after his name was made public"

Only Ambassordor Joe Wilson is the wrong man to screw with.

[AndyTiedye]

4. Nobody Fucks with the CIA

I woulda thought anybody named Bush would know that.

[Sliverofhope]

5. The media can't pretend not to know about this story.

Bastards.

[goforit]

6. For some reason I seem to believe that this story, as big as it is,....

Is gonna die like all the others.

What happenned to Skilling, Lay and poppy Bush for that matter.
They have their feet kick up down on a Carribean Island.

Meanwhile there is no justice.

[annagull]

7. Howie says it will be swept under the rug

If recent history is any guide, federal investigators are unlikely to discover who the leakers are. In 1999, a federal appeals court ruled that independent counsel Kenneth W. Starr and his staff did not have to face contempt proceedings for allegedly leaking damaging information about President Bill Clinton because no grand jury secrets were disclosed. The next year, a former Starr spokesman, Charles G. Bakaly III, was acquitted of making false statements about his role in providing information to the New York Times.

In 1992, Senate investigators said they could not determine who leaked confidential information to National Public Radio and Newsday about Anita Hill's sexual harassment allegations against Clarence Thomas during his Supreme Court confirmation. In 1989, then-Attorney General Richard Thornburgh launched an unsuccessful $224,000 investigation of a leak to CBS of an inquiry into then-Rep. William H. Gray III (D-Pa.).

Uhmm, Howie, none of the examples you listed resulted in a CIA operative's cover being blown. There is alot more at stake than a leak from a witch hunt. This is treason.

[SoCalDem]

8. Whaddayawannabet

that somehow this will get spun into how the PRESS is to blame for not being "partiotic" and by reporting on things they should not be.:(

I have no faith at all in the way they report..

[grasswire]

9. this part is very odd

NBC's Washington bureau chief, Tim Russert, and ABC's bureau chief, Robin Sproul, said yesterday they could not discuss any matter involving confidential sources. But John Roberts, a CBS White House correspondent, said that to his knowledge, no administration official had contacted anyone at the network about Wilson.

If anyone had called him, Roberts said, "I'd immediately have to wonder what the ulterior motive was. We'd probably end up doing a story about somebody breaching national security by leaking the name of a CIA operative."
...........

But we know that Andrea Mitchell, NBC's senior correspondent, was peddled the leak. Right?

[SidDithers]

11. Way to go John!

He's a good Canadian boy. He wasn't really the sharpest knife in the drawer when he worked up here, but still nice to see that's he's done well for himself.

Sid

[SoCalDem]

13. CBS was probably NOT contacted.. They have been on the WH shitlist

since Dan Rather started slamming W..:)

[spinkbottle]

16. No bet

This was my first thought when I read the article. Howie is the epitome of whoredom--somewhow this is going to be spun into "let's muzzle that liberal pres" for the good of Amurrika!

Geez, I hang out here for a few days and already I need a bigger tinfoil hat!

:tinfoilhat:

[pocoloco]

10. Why do you think Novak followed through with the story.

Wonder if he has an axe to grind?

[kodi]

12. bush should demand his subordinates take lie detector tests or be fired

a real president, concerned about national security would fire anyone who refused to take a lie detector test because of national secutity concerns where lives were at stake.

[leetrisck]

14. The "Slimy Shrub" people lie so much

they could all pass a lie detector pass

[Devils Advocate NZ]

15. Actually, I would say the opposite...

They all lie so much that none of them would get past the "Is your name So-and-So?" and they would ALL fail.