Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Armstrong Williams and the Shield Law connection

Posted on 07/21/2005 6:35:46 AM PDT by Crush T Velour

Armstrong Williams was castigated in the Press for taking advertising money to advocate a program he was already advocating. The crime? He didn't "disclose" his financial "relationship" with the Education Department.

So why is it that the Press can discuss the shield law in a manner that can only be described as ADVOCATING it, without disclosing "Oh by the way, we reporters and anchorpeople who are reporting this? We're the major beneficiaries of this law. This law is seeking to give us an exemption that other Americans don't have. This law won't for example protect bloggers...just us."

Personally, I think it is a good thing that the next time the NYT gins up a phony scandal that was actually caused by one of THEIR reporters, that their reporters might actually have to suffer for it to any degree that they are involved.


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; News/Current Events; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: armstrongwilliams; shieldlaw

1 posted on 07/21/2005 6:35:47 AM PDT by Crush T Velour
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Crush T Velour

good point, only according to the press, all are created equal, but some (the press) Are more equal than others.


2 posted on 07/21/2005 6:37:39 AM PDT by camle (keep your mind open and somebody will fill it full of something for you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Crush T Velour
Shield laws will protect reports when they take cash from foreign governments to report secret information or report false information that the foreign government wants to appear to be true.

Assume the a Reuters reporter in Washington, DC is told/learns at a Saudi/Syrian/Egyptian reception that a Palestian, known to be a Hamas leader, will present martyrs' checks at a house in Gaza at 10:00AM on 7/22/05. The reporter, in turn, sells that information to one of the DC Mossad agents and, a little after 10:00 AM on 7/22/05, the IDF takes out the house and the Hamas guy.

In the subsequent law suit (the Hamas guy was a Canadian by birth), the Reuters reporter claims immunity under the shield law.

The same Reuters guy would be as likely to sell US targeting material to the next batch of Muslim 9/11 terrorists. If caught, would he be allowed to claim immunity under the shield law? A confidential source is a property right to help enrich lazy reporters. It has nothing to do with "freedom of the press" and, in fact, allows a corrupt media to protect those who fudge circulation numbers, fake sources and pursue a political agenda.

3 posted on 07/21/2005 7:01:31 AM PDT by Tacis ("Democrats - The Party of Traitors, Treachery and Treason!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tacis

Reporters/media should NOT have any protection to fabricate stories, they should be held fully accountable for the crap they publish.


4 posted on 07/21/2005 7:27:31 AM PDT by Nathan Zachary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson