I'm not sure that's true. She may be tight-lipped on her own, without regard to the effect this has on the NYT.
This is a link to the unflattering piece I mentioned a couple of posts up. ...
Judith Miller Goes With What She's Got
It has a few interesting statements ...
... on March 23, a friend-of-the-court brief was submitted by 36 news organizations arguing that there is substantial evidence "to doubt that a crime has been committed" by the leaker. ...What is Miller's public campaign - waged all across the country - all about, other than a transparent attempt to rehabilitate her damaged reputation as a journalist?...
The irony is that, rather than protecting her newspaper, she is imperiling it by rejecting out of hand the idea of some sort of negotiated compromise with the prosecutor. A veteran Times reporter critically reflected on her role in the Plame case: Around the water cooler of the Washington bureau, there is a strong feeling that "for the second time in two years, she will have brought disgrace to The Times."
It must be agreed that the NYT certainly is not openly complaining about her being jailed. I conclude, therefore, that it does not bother them too much. Are you sayiing that is pleasing to the NYT? Their complaints are far too faint. They are simply buying time and hoping it will fade. Ms. Miller, on the otherhand, has her life turned upsidedown...and the question remains...WHY?
It must be agreed that the NYT certainly is not openly complaining about her being jailed. I conclude, therefore, that it does not bother them too much. Are you sayiing that is pleasing to the NYT? Their complaints are far too faint. They are simply buying time and hoping it will fade. Ms. Miller, on the otherhand, has her life turned upsidedown...and the question remains...WHY?