Posted on 08/01/2005 6:12:20 AM PDT by OESY
...[N]ews organizations are trying to outwit a new generation of prosecutors and protect reporters and sources in what they believe to be an increasingly antagonistic environment.
In some instances, news executives are issuing guidelines to educate and retrain their staffs about taking precautions to protect their notes and other source materials from being sought as evidence in legal cases. Some are also looking at technological fixes like heightened encryption and e-mail messages that expire after a period of time....
Several news organizations had already begun clamping down on the use of anonymous sources and tightening the rules for when they could be used. But the guidelines being issued now are an acknowledgment that such sources may still be used and need to be protected.
Time Inc. is looking at new guidelines for reporters on how to avoid identifying sources in notes and e-mail messages, such as using initials or a code name instead of the source's real name.
Time executives have also asked their technology department to explore various options, including the possible development of a special portable hard drive that would let reporters remove all their notes from a company computer. That way, the company could say that it did not have access to such notes.
Bill Keller, executive editor of The New York Times... said he wanted to develop "new guidelines to minimize the potential exposure of confidential source material." He said the guidelines would include some practices used by investigative reporters who have experience with confidential sources.
Mr. Keller said he expected to issue such guidelines "within the next few weeks, after consulting with tech folks and the lawyers"....
The Times is also looking into ways of bundling office telephone extensions so that calls to and from particular reporters cannot be identified....
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
The communists are reviving the KGB.
I thought the NYT had a way to shield sources already in place. They make up sources.
Codes Names?
The fat toad whose breath reeks of alcohol and who killed a girl in his car.
That's one possible example.
For example...If referring to Valerie Plame...Just refer to her as the Lame Lady.
Shhhhh! Don't tell them, but there's ways to recover data that has been erased.
Their second, confirming source for dirt on Republicans is the Magic Eightball. If you'd attended Journalism school, you'd know this.
Now they get to it?
The little jump drives have become ubiquitous for over a year.
This is the real story here. The BOSSES do not want to deal with the issue so they are trying to figure out ways to cut the reporters in the event of trouble.
This is the MSM killing themselves because it essentially makes every reporter a "free agent".
Why not put Jason Blair in charge since there will no longer be any way to verify if a source even exists.
IANAL, but the fact that they have discussed this beforehand for this purpose establishes an intent for them to evade the law, which is a prerequisite for a conspiracy charge...
This is all a result of the press abusing their priviliges, just like the judicial system has abused it's powers.
In theory, I'm opposed to mandatory sentence 'guidelines'. I think the judges should determine what the sentence should be. In practice, however, that has resulted in judges sentencing hardened criminals to little or no time. As a result we absolutely need mandatory sentences.
The press should be free to publish with anonymous sources. However, they have aboused that privilige to the point where they are making things up, protecting criminals and criminal acts, and going after their political enemies, no holds barred. As a result, they are going to lose some of their priviliges.
I kinda read it that way, too. All they're doing, is trying to skirt the Law.
All these "precautions" sound like the sort of advice your typical lawyer would give a client he knows is engaged in a criminal enterprise.
The same sort of advice that Enron executives were prosecuted for, and for which Arthur Anderson was destroyed.
Why do you suppose that is?
Is it that reporters would rather protect crooks than protect our society?
Let me pose a hypothetical question: What if a NYT reporter had gotten wind of the pending attacks of the World Trade Center, Pentagon, and elsewhere: would he have "protected his source," and failed to do anything to prevent the attacks?
I fear the answer is "Yes."
The problem with the msn's anonymous sources that we've seen all too much of here lately is.... they don't exist!
So many msn reporters getting caught making up stories makes me read everything from the msn with a grain of salt. I've gotten so I don't believe anything I read from them until I see a second, third or fourth source.
Valerie Plame the future third ex-wife of Joe Wilson could be XXX.
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.