Journo Under Siege: Where is the Justice

I am living in a world where the boundaries of justice and freedom seem to blur with an ease which reminiscent of the silver screen's ability to blur boundaries of the possible and impossible. Journalists are a unique breed of people; they are the citizens who speak for truth, fight for it, and reveal its amorphous face to the world. It seems however, that people do not always appreciate the lengths journalists go to, to do their job and the fact that at the end of the day journalists are still people who have moral boundaries and ethics to uphold.

In October of 2001, Judith Miller and Matthew Cooper were asked to present evidence in the court case investigating the revelation of Valerie Plame as a member of the CIA. In order to present the evidence, both journalists would have to retract promises of confidence given to their sources and reveal those sources names. "Courts should not be able to 'just willy nilly extract information from reporters,' U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton of Washington told an American Bar Association panel on proposed shield legislation" (www.firstamendmentcenter.org). The mentioned shield legislation is a bill that states the rights journalists have to withhold information they have sworn to privacy in court. The bills leave room for instances in which national security or public safety is at risk but in general would have given protection to Journalists like Miller and Cooper. As a result of their initial refusal, both Miller and Cooper declined the demands of the court, an action that led to their being held in contempt. Miller eventually gave in to the court's wishes thanks to a discussion between his lawyer and his source’s that led to an agreement of disclosure. However, with no such agreement given to her, Miller refused to give the name of her source and was sentenced to 18 months in jail on July 6 2005 after months of appeals.

This is not the only instance of a journalist being oppressed by courts though, Claire O'Brien is a reporter in Kansas who in regards to her situation with the court said, "I feel profoundly betrayed. I have been prepared to take one of the most difficult steps a citizen can take and I haven't been given the dignity of representation ... to facilitate my choice, I have been told that I have to betray my sources in order to get legal help" (www.firstamendmentcenter.org). However, this case seems to fall all the other side of the issues because, "prosecutors want her notes from a jailhouse interview with a suspect in a shooting that left one man dead and another wounded. They also want to know the identity of confidential sources who alluded that the suspect might be in danger" (www.firstamendmentcenter.org).

While the argument can be made that it is the safety of the people the court pursues, the journalist pursues the safety of their source and in so doing practices ethical journalism. Aren’t ethical journalists what we desire?