Yeah, yeah... Long time, no blog. I'm back today in rant mode.
So, its typically been a given that reporters (print, radio, and television) have some responsibility to keep their sources confidential when it comes to trying to get to the truth in matters they are reporting on. But in the past decade or so, that protection seems to be fading away with reporters compelled to reveal who gave them information or face jail time.
Many have taken the jail time, such as the reporter in the Valerie Plame case, rather than give up their trusted sources.
Congress is trying to right the situation with the Free Flow of Information Act. The act originally protected bloggers are "journalists" but has been changed so that it only covers people who use their reporting as their paid profession. That change in of itself doesn't really bother me. What does is that that change and some others were made by Congress to appease the Bush administration but now they are thinking of vetoing the legislation anyway.
Turns out the the Director of National Intelligence, Mike McConnell, is none too happy with the new law as it would limit their ability to prosecute federal cases.
What? Why does the prosecutorial department of the Executive branch get a backbone when faced with reporters that publish stories that look unfavorably on the government but do not think twice about refusing to prosecute a member of the President's posse when they leak information outing a CIA operative... or are called to Congress to testify about surveillance methods that seemingly go against Constitutional law... or any of the other times all the President has to say to someone is, "don't tell them anything," and everyone goes mum?
The fact that this passed the House with a 398 to 21 vote bodes well for the chance at beating a veto and it still has to come up for a vote in the Senate. Getting 66 votes there may be the larger challenge, but if it passes well there, will Mr. Bush hold to his "high moral ground" and sign the veto anyway? Or will he wilt when his party realizes that they don't need a defeat right now?
More on the story over at BetaNews.
Technorati Tags: Congress, Bush, Journalists, Free Flow of Information Act
So, its typically been a given that reporters (print, radio, and television) have some responsibility to keep their sources confidential when it comes to trying to get to the truth in matters they are reporting on. But in the past decade or so, that protection seems to be fading away with reporters compelled to reveal who gave them information or face jail time.
Many have taken the jail time, such as the reporter in the Valerie Plame case, rather than give up their trusted sources.
Congress is trying to right the situation with the Free Flow of Information Act. The act originally protected bloggers are "journalists" but has been changed so that it only covers people who use their reporting as their paid profession. That change in of itself doesn't really bother me. What does is that that change and some others were made by Congress to appease the Bush administration but now they are thinking of vetoing the legislation anyway.
Turns out the the Director of National Intelligence, Mike McConnell, is none too happy with the new law as it would limit their ability to prosecute federal cases.
What? Why does the prosecutorial department of the Executive branch get a backbone when faced with reporters that publish stories that look unfavorably on the government but do not think twice about refusing to prosecute a member of the President's posse when they leak information outing a CIA operative... or are called to Congress to testify about surveillance methods that seemingly go against Constitutional law... or any of the other times all the President has to say to someone is, "don't tell them anything," and everyone goes mum?
The fact that this passed the House with a 398 to 21 vote bodes well for the chance at beating a veto and it still has to come up for a vote in the Senate. Getting 66 votes there may be the larger challenge, but if it passes well there, will Mr. Bush hold to his "high moral ground" and sign the veto anyway? Or will he wilt when his party realizes that they don't need a defeat right now?
More on the story over at BetaNews.
Technorati Tags: Congress, Bush, Journalists, Free Flow of Information Act
Powered by ScribeFire.
Comments
There are too many in the press (David Gregory comes to mind) who are so anti-Bush that they would stop at nothing to embarrass him even it meant people dying.