Staying in the background

That's where reporters like to be when they are covering the news. Becoming part of a story inevitably changes the story and destroys the reporter's position as an independent observer. Michael Bamberger, golf writer for Sport Illustrated, found himself in the untenable position of becoming part of the story when he was covering golf phenom Michelle Wie at a golf tournament this weekend. A columnist for the Washington Post says he should not have done what he did; a columnist for the Los Angeles Times says he should have done it earlier. And there might be a third option.

More

Read more about journalism and issues facing the profession at JPROF.com.

Miller, New York Times finally open up

Judith Miller and the New York Times have finally published accounts of the controversy that landed Miller in jail for 85 days this summer. A careful reading of them leads you to believe that Miller went to jail because of a misunderstanding between her lawyers and those of Lewis Libby, chief aide to Vice President Dick Chaney.

But there are other questions that the accounts raise. This one, for instance:

Why was Judith Miller parsing the quality (voluntary, not voluntary, etc.) of the release of the confidentiality pledge that she received from her source? Obviously, it wasn't voluntary. Think about it.

Matthew Cooper did not have any problem with whether or not Lewis Libby's release had been "voluntary."

Miller's stance on this question adds an undue burden on a reporter. Reporters are not responsible for the situations sources may find themselves in. And how are they to tell is a release is "voluntary"?

Miller's decision to protect her source was the right one. She had pledged confidentiality, and she needed to honor that. When she was released from that pledge, that should have ended it.

More

Read more about journalism and issues facing the profession at JPROF.com.

The odd odyssey of Judith Miller

New York Times reporter Judith Miller got her Get Out of Jail card last week, but her release wasn't exactly free. She had come to an agreement to testify after being released from her confidentiality obligation by her source. And she has had to endure some pretty stinging criticism from fellow journalists who have questioned her motives. The bigger question -- and one that David Ignatius raises in his column in the Washington Post -- is where were the Times editors in all of this?

More

Read more about journalism and issues facing the profession at JPROF.com.