"It's pretty much an inviolable rule of journalism: Protect your sources. Reporters have gone to jail to keep that covenant. But Marcy Wheeler, who writes a well-regarded national security blog, not only revealed a source - she did so to the FBI, eventually becoming a witness in special counsel Robert S. Mueller III's investigation of President Trump's possible connections to Russia."
"As I read it, Marcy's post was not primarily about the investigation into the Russian interference in the 2016 election, though that is what has gotten a lot of the attention. What she was really talking about was the practice - or should I say 'malpractice'? - of journalism. Woven into the entire post, Marcy laid out how she wrestled with a very basic question:"
Protecting confidential sources is a core journalistic covenant, and reporters have gone to jail to uphold it. A national-security blogger revealed a confidential source to the FBI and later became a witness in Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller III's investigation into possible connections between President Trump and Russia. The blogger maintained that the source's conduct justified loss of protection. The episode raises a central ethical question: what should a journalist do when a confidential source lies or deliberately misleads? One appropriate approach is to distinguish among types of sources: those who tell the truth, those who believe inaccurate information, and those who intentionally deceive.
Read at Emptywheel
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]