Frontline News War: Secrets, Sources & Spin
Wed, 02/14/2007 - 12:01am
I wanted to see what PBS would do with the Libby leak thing. Frontline had several people on from the Times, New York Times, and Washington Post to really cover all aspects of journalism's first amendment rights. (Please, no flame I'm being sarcastic.)
The coverage was only 95% liberal which was a tremendous surprise. A few facts "leaked" through so that if you were really paying attention near the end you would have realized that Libby wasn't the leak.
The basic argument seems to be that the first amendment supersedes anything else, including national security. Protecting sources is the most important thing in the United States of America. Of course I don't agree with that, there should be balance.
For instance, if reporters know of a plan to assassinate the President, or if they know of someone leaking secrets to our enemies, they had better speak up. Otherwise they are accomplices not journalists.
The coverage was only 95% liberal which was a tremendous surprise. A few facts "leaked" through so that if you were really paying attention near the end you would have realized that Libby wasn't the leak.
The basic argument seems to be that the first amendment supersedes anything else, including national security. Protecting sources is the most important thing in the United States of America. Of course I don't agree with that, there should be balance.
For instance, if reporters know of a plan to assassinate the President, or if they know of someone leaking secrets to our enemies, they had better speak up. Otherwise they are accomplices not journalists.
