NEW YORK - Time Inc. said Thursday it would comply with a court order to deliver the notes of a reporter threatened with jail in the investigation of the leak of an undercover CIA officer's name.
In a statement, Time said it believes "the Supreme Court has limited press freedom in ways that will have a chilling effect on our work and that may damage the free flow of information that is so necessary in a democratic society." ' --------------------- I'm not sure I agree with that. The reporters essentially helped a source commit a federal crime and I don't believe freedom of the press extends that far. That is, I don't think the law permits reporters to assist in a federal crime. For example, let's say a reporter has a mob source. Even though the source is committing crimes, the reporter isn't helping, they're just reporting on the activity. Or take Watergate, while it was a crime to release the Deepthroat info, the reporters were reporting on another crime committed by gov't. In this case, the reporters were revealing the identity of a CIA agent not because of gov't wrong doing, but to explain why Mr. Bush chose an envoy. And the revelation was not in support of abuse of power but was actually abusing power. The reporters essentially assisted a gov't official commit a federal crime and the beneficiary was the gov't. Why should the constitution protect government publicity? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble Ticket application http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:162442 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
