Reporter jailed for refusal to name leak source

Wide impact seen
News executives and observers, however, did not think that details of the case would limit its impact on journalism.

“This investigation — whether it intended to or not — is intimidating sources and journalists,” said Jane Kirtley, professor of media ethics and law at the University of Minnesota. “In a climate of increasing secrecy, it raises a question of whether the people will be reduced to just getting the official line from the government.”

Grasping for a silver lining outside the courthouse, New York Times executive editor Bill Keller said maybe someone in government with information to disclose will understand the lengths to which reporters will go to protect sources.

Brant Houston, executive director of Investigate Reporters and Editors, predicted, “There will still be stories based on anonymous sources. But this will make every reporter think twice about granting anonymity, which they really should do anyway.”

Deanna Sands, Omaha, Neb., World-Herald managing editor and president of Associated Press Managing Editors Association, was less optimistic.

“It raises the specter of government intervention in the gathering of information and has to be noticed by anyone considering talking to a reporter,” Sands said in a telephone interview. “It’s more likely to give people pause.

“Unfortunately, we’ll never know how many good stories we won’t get to write.”

A test?
The Miller-Cooper case has been seen as a test of press freedom, and numerous media groups have lined up behind the reporters. Thirty-one states and the District of Columbia have shield laws protecting reporters from having to identify their confidential sources, though there is no federal protection. Congress is considering a bill, however, and Cooper and others involved in the case have urged passage.

Hogan and Fitzgerald stressed that they were not asking Miller to identify a whistleblower but rather a possible criminal. Disclosure of an undercover intelligence officer’s identity can be a federal crime if done intentionally and the leaker knew of the secret status.

Hogan said allowing Miller to defy the courts would be a step toward anarchy. He saw “a realistic possibility that confinement might cause her to testify” or persuade her source to give her the same release Cooper’s gave him.

Miller was seen entering the Alexandria, Va., Detention Center, where she could remain until the grand jury expires Oct. 28.

MORE FROM POLITICS

Politics Section Front

Reid tasks 10 senators to find public option fix CQ: More doctors might be Rx for House GOP Senate to confront abortion in health debate NYT: U.S. forecasts smaller loss from bank bailout Bernanke: Too soon to tell if recovery will last Impeachment debate in S.C. focuses on tryst Political strife over abortion Climate talks open with pressure on U.S. U.S. donates gear needed in Afghan fight to Iraq   Obama and the arts — a love affair? Politics Section Front   Add Politics headlines to your news reader: