When Journalists Become Monkeys in the Jungle

Ah yes, Judith Miller of The New York Times goes to jail for refusing to divulge her anonymous sources.

Surely that symbolizes the moral cloud under which journalists now operate.

When reporters "defy the law," they may cite high principle. But beneath it all can be narrow self interest, or hunger to preserve professional standing by maintaining the ability to be trusted by future sources who may seek a reporter as a safe mouthpiece. How easy it may seem to hide behind the confidentiality of being a reporter's anonymous source!

As important as confidentiality of sources can be, we now have a situation where anonymous sources are as much a part of the problem as of the solution.

Beware anonymous sources.

Too often a scoop is a trap in disquise laid by an anonymous dagger carrying assassin whose motives have nothing to do with public interest or freedom of the press.

When hungry journalists race through the jungle eager to harvest any piece of fruit devious monkeys toss their way, it is the journalists who can end up as monkeys.

It is not at all clear that today's Judith Millers protect "whistleblowers." Indeed they may be in the service of ruthless "spin doctors" who seek to hide behind journalistic skirts to manipulate politics and public opinion for partisan political purposes.

Far better to focus on the important issues: do not allow oneself to be used!!!!! Keep the big picture in mind --- and do not be seduced by the promise of an "easy" scoop.

The still unproven assertion is that someone close to the Bush Administration was an anonymous source trying to convince reporters such as Judith Miller to unmask Valerie Plame as a undercover CIA operative. Although Judith Miller did not use what an anonymous source may have told her to "out" Plame, conservative commentator Robert Novak did. Ironically no one has at least publicly threatened to put him in jail!

What is at stake? The scuttlebut is that someone wanted to damage Plame's career, to get revenge on her husband, former Ambassador to Iraq Joseph Wilson, an outspoken critic of Bush plans to invade Iraq.

That Time Magazine parted company with Miller to gave up the court sought documents partly so that its reporter could stay out of jail further darkens the brew. If it seems a bit like professional aggrandizement for Miller to hold back, It seems a bit like corporate expediency for Time to give in.

Oddly Judith Miller, brilliant, accomplished though she is as a preeminent Times expert on terrorism, also is the reporter accused by anti-war critics of helping open the door to invade Iraq.

Her critics say passed on too uncritically the scare mongering anti-Saddam spin on weapons of mass destruction peddled to both press and government by partisans of Iraqi expatriate Ahmed Chalabi. Miller and others passed on the "spin" partly based on tips by anonymous sources.

Chalabi is a controversial figure for many reasons. In the lead-up to the 2003 invasion of Iraq, under his guidance, a major portion of the information on which U.S. Intelligence based its condemnation of Saddam Hussein, including reports of weapons of mass destruction and alleged ties to al-Qaeda, filtered its way to the U.S. government and into the U.S. media.

Much of this information has turned out to be false. That is one reason for a recent falling out between Chalabi and the Bush Administration.

So some see Miller not simply as a champion of freedom of the press but as a symbol of just how much a journalist can be corrupted by anonymous sources with hidden agendas.

Miller published nothing about Valerie Plame. Still, she appears to have allowed herself to be excessively manipulated by anonymous sources -- in what appears to be a failure of journalism accuracy and credibility.

So it comes to pass that on occasion a reporter's principles can also be a tool aiding misinformation and corruption -- for an anonymous source can have a license to irresponsibly spin!!!!!!