I took a journalism class or two at a local community college.
I say this, because I don't want to sound flippant about the "need for confidentiality" when it comes to reporting. I think that far too often, the concept of reporter privilege is overused. For that matter, I don't get it in the first place. Why should a reporter have any greater ability to keep something confidential then an ordinary citizen?
Yet, some liberals are now arguing for a "shield law" that will protect reporters from having to reveal their sources.
While thinking about this, I read an article today about a journalist named Cooper who is going to reveal his source. The source gave him the go-ahead, so now he's going to talk to the judge.
I believe that the liberal demand for a "shield law" will depend on the name that he gives the judge.
A number of reporters are saying that the source was Karl Rove. I think this is ridiculous, because I can't see two liberal organizations protecting Karl Rove, even if they *did* promise confidentiality. However, if Cooper emits the words "Karl Rove", I don't think that liberals will continue to argue for a "shield law."
On the other hand, if Cooper says "Wesley Clark" or "Joe Wilson", or someone liberal, the demand for a shield law is going to explode overnight.
That's my prediction. Let's see what happens.
No comments:
Post a Comment