Comments on: Oh, for fuck’s sake

By: andrew

andrew — Thu, 07 Jul 2005 13:06:00 +0000

There's no way the investigation could have reached the stage of jailing Miller without government backing.

I don't think the American legal system is that compromised (yet). It seems to be purely the work of a zealous prosecutor.

By: Tim

Tim — Thu, 07 Jul 2005 09:17:00 +0000

It’s not just her credibility which is at stake, but the credibility of journalists in general. If people think that journalists are going to have to make a choice between revealing their sources and going to prison, they’re not going to have much confidence in guarantees of anonymity. That’s what makes this an attack on press freedom.

By: Michael

Michael — Thu, 07 Jul 2005 05:59:00 +0000

Freedom of the press does not mean immunity from prosecution for journalists when they break the law. And it shouldn't.

Absolutely - which is why this is such a difficult call: career or jail?

Mind you, it's not that tough: it's only a four-month sentence, with ample opportunity for feature spin-offs (both in the publishing and film rights sense), so I suspect she'll end up doing rather well out of it.

By: Matt

Matt — Thu, 07 Jul 2005 05:17:00 +0000

Surely it’s not a difficult moral problem. Why can’t the Bush Administration just reveal who the source was? Or confirm, given everyone knows who it was.

By: john b

john b — Thu, 07 Jul 2005 05:05:00 +0000

I believe Fidel, if not Saddam, to be extremely keen on releasing people on the grounds that they've grassed up everyone else.

There's no way the investigation could have reached the stage of jailing Miller without government backing. Presumably they believe the principle of being allowed to lock up hacks outweighs the value of whomever Miller's protecting.

Since they obviously know who Miller is protecting, I suspect they're probably in a strong position to make that judgement.

By: Squander Two

Squander Two — Thu, 07 Jul 2005 04:45:00 +0000

Journalists don’t have extra rights that other people don’t. The whole point of freedom of the press is that everyone should be free to publish their opinion without government license. And they are. Freedom of the press does not mean immunity from prosecution for journalists when they break the law. And it shouldn’t.

By: Michael

Michael — Thu, 07 Jul 2005 02:16:00 +0000

She could avoid jail if she wants to. All she has to do is snitch. Her choice.

...albeit one that would involve flushing her career down the toilet, as who would talk to her in confidence after that? Compared to that, going to jail to protect the integrity of her source (as well as a fundamental principle of journalism) seems like a very sensible move.

By: Keven Lofty

Keven Lofty — Wed, 06 Jul 2005 21:42:00 +0000

Seeing as Miller is going to jail for protecting a source that was leaking information to discredit a prominent Bush critic I doubt very much it’s the Republicans doing this.

By: andrew

andrew — Wed, 06 Jul 2005 21:26:00 +0000

Holy smokes, Angry-And-Uninformed Man, you mean the Plame investigation was actually a complex Republican plot to get Judith Miller imprisoned? How fiendish.

Tune in next week to hear Angry-And-Uninformed Man explain that Saddam must have been hiding something because he expelled the UN weapons inspectors...

By: max

max — Wed, 06 Jul 2005 20:33:00 +0000

The latest innovation is jailing journalists
Bollocks, Jaling journalists who broke the law, or maybe possessing a journalist title is a guarantee against prosecution?
Second, She could avoid jail if she wants to. All she has to do is snitch. Her choice. I doubt journalists would get such an option from Saddam or Fidelski.