U.S. Attorney Refutes L.A. Times Story

Last week Ted Kennedy and 19 other Boston-area pols and union leaders wrote one of the most unusual letters to the editor you?ll ever see. They wanted the New York Times, which owns the Boston Globe, to ease up on job cuts and preserve New England?s largest newspaper. It's always nice to see democratic leaders fighting for freedom of the press, like Condi Rice slapping the Russians the other day for restricting press rights there. But all the job cuts in the world and all the finger-wagging at Russia aren't going to matter if the First Amendment continues to be gutted in this country. Newspapers, which provide almost all of the information on which the Internet, radio and television thrive, are struggling in the marketplace, while at the same time journalists are under attack from their government. When papers are fighting to meet market pressures, reporters? jobs and the stories that will be missed aren?t the only casualties. Newspapers suddenly have to wonder how they will withstand the threat of subpoenas and the legal cost of fighting them. We?ve written before that Hearst Newspapers has found itself fighting about 80 subpoenas this year, compared with five in all of 2005. One of those subpoenas was issued to reporters Mark Fainaru-Wada and Lance Armstrong of Hearst?s San Francisco Chronicle, demanding that they reveal sources from their BALCO reporting (check out markandlance.org to support them or learn more about their case). Because they face jail time, and because the Chronicle is looking at $1,000 a day in fines (during an 18-month grand jury that could total more than $180,000), newspapers all over the country are deciding not to pursue investigations and stories that they know will lead to contempt charges. Thirty-one states and the District of Columbia have ?shield? laws that offer at least partial protection to journalists like Mark and Lance, but the federal government does not. The only thing that might save them from jail time, and restore the right of the press to hold its government accountable, is a bipartisan federal shield bill that is languishing in Congress. A couple of radio geniuses talking on television the other night about how this is a good thing for the Chronicle, that whatever they lose in fines they?ll make up in free publicity. First, they won?t. Watch the Chronicle?s circulation figures while this case continues and see whether they?re higher than the same period in previous years. But even if the Chron sold a million papers a day because of this, it wouldn?t mean a thing compared to the chilling effect that is being felt in newsrooms all over the country. What those talking heads who rely on newspapers for their lifeblood are missing is the fact that they are already living in a world where American journalists are afraid to write stories that could enlighten the public. And if the pols really want to do something for journalism in this country, they could take that energy and put it into passing the federal shield law.

Posted at: 05.02.2008
Search | Posted by: Publisher