Judith Miller

[blackcanary_416]

What are your thoughts?

for those of you who don't know...
Judith Miller is a journalist who was sent to jail over not revealing her source in the scandal involving Valerie Plame who had her identity leaked as an undercover C.I.A. operative.

My opinion:
Judith is in a constant lie to protect her source. Which kind of shows seeing how one moment she can't remember how "Valerie Flame" which should have been Plame got into her notebook and then later says that Lewis Libby was the source but takes it back saying he did not reveal Plame.
Something fishy with the whole thing about WMD I think this was paranoia from Bush, obviously. The whole thing is just a mess because both sides don't want to take fault.
Going to school for Journalism (my lack of posting) I further think that putting a journalist in jail because some dick at the whithouse leaked information is unacceptable. But thats just me :rolleyes:

[jerrymcl89]

I'm curious as to why the allegedly liberal New York Times has continued to keep someone who is obviously an agent of the Bush administration, and more loyal to that administration than she is to the truth, on the payroll. No one who would go before a grand jury and testify that she cannot remember who her sources are should really be considered a journalist.

[Jeff Brady]

This REALLY should be in the Ultra Mega Bad-Ass Political thread.

[blackcanary_416]

I'm curious as to why the allegedly liberal New York Times has continued to keep someone who is obviously an agent of the Bush administration, and more loyal to that administration than she is to the truth, on the payroll. No one who would go before a grand jury and testify that she cannot remember who her sources are should really be considered a journalist.

I agree, but like I said I think she's lying and one of the things a journalist does not do is reveal their sources (I don't agree with that all of the time)but in all of this they should put more investigation into the White House than a person in the media. After all it began with the leak.

[blackcanary_416]

This REALLY should be in the Ultra Mega Bad-Ass Political thread.

Oops :) you're right. I forgot about that. Been away for a while.

[jerrymcl89]

I agree, but like I said I think she's lying and one of the things a journalist does not do is reveal their sources (I don't agree with that all of the time)but in all of this they should put more investigation into the White House than a person in the media. After all it began with the leak.

The problem is, I'm pretty sure she has been lying to her employers. Which is a worse sin than revealing her sources. Just as Rove should be fired if he lied to Bush, Miller should be fired if she lied (or refused to answer) to her editors.

[blackcanary_416]

The problem is, I'm pretty sure she has been lying to her employers. Which is a worse sin than revealing her sources. Just as Rove should be fired if he lied to Bush, Miller should be fired if she lied (or refused to answer) to her editors.

I surprised that they let her back as well. I would be weary of having her back. But I'm just saying that all this with her is kind of ridiculous seeing as how she is a part of the media and not the cause of the leak.

[jerrymcl89]

I surprised that they let her back as well. I would be weary of having her back. But I'm just saying that all this with her is kind of ridiculous seeing as how she is a part of the media and not the cause of the leak.

Very true. But as far as I can tell, Miller is now off the hook legally, while Rove, Libby, etc. could be in bigger trouble, as they perhaps should be.

The difference for me is that even if Libby and Rove broke the law, I at least understand why they would. They are part of the administration, and were trying to advance its interests. Whereas Miller, IMO, in no way, shape, or form served the interests of the New York Times.

[blackcanary_416]

Very true. But as far as I can tell, Miller is now off the hook legally, while Rove, Libby, etc. could be in bigger trouble, as they perhaps should be.

The difference for me is that even if Libby and Rove broke the law, I at least understand why they would. They are part of the administration, and were trying to advance its interests. Whereas Miller, IMO, in no way, shape, or form served the interests of the New York Times.

Yeah but I mean outing a operative just because they feel like it is dangerous beyond comparison. Operatives are already on the line and now their own country can't even keep their identity hush.

[jerrymcl89]

I agree. I think the administration has shown, on several occasions, a real disdain for the (at least theoretically) non-political career employees of the CIA, State Department, and several other agencies.

[Gail Simone]

I just want to find out the truth, but it sure seems like Judith Miller was a total administration shill.

Gail

[the4thpip]

New York Times reporter Judith Miller has begun discussing her future employment options with the newspaper, including the possibility of a severance package, a lawyer familiar with the matter, said yesterday.

The discussion about her future comes several days after the public rupture of the relationship between the Times and Ms. Miller, a 28-year veteran of the paper. Both the editor and the publisher of the Times have expressed regret for their unequivocal support for Ms. Miller when she spent 85 days in jail for refusing to testify before a federal grand jury investigating the unmasking of a Central Intelligence Agency operative.

http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB113029079693179566-WQ_zjcgphX1WK05ICLNuyGb5YmM_20051125.html?mod=blog s

[TheLyle]

I just want to find out the truth, but it sure seems like Judith Miller was a total administration shill.

At the very least, it sounds like she allowed herself to become blinded to journalistic standards in her quest for fame and glory, neglecting her obligation to double check what her high-level, anonymous sources were telling her.

Well, she got the fame she seemed to be seeking.

In some ways, what I've seen of Miller's career reminds me of David Brock's memoir of being a right-wing attack dog. At different moments, Brock pleads ignorance of journalistic standards, rationalization and letting himself get discracted by "the movement". It's an interesting book, an interesting glimpse into the media bubble.

[Pixies Chick]

A journalist's highest obligation has to be to the truth, otherwise, what's the point? I wonder what she tells herself to cope with weight of all the deaths that have come from the administration lies she championed.

I think she's claimed too long that she is not obligated to be accurate or complete, but rather faithful to her sources, to be considered a reporter any longer. IOW, if there's a slippery slope, she's got some muddy nylons creeping up her buttcrack, 'cause she took one hell of a slide down Mount Apparatchik.

[Karl J. Barnes]

http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB113029079693179566-WQ_zjcgphX1WK05ICLNuyGb5YmM_20051125.html?mod=blog s

Absolutely love the last part, where Ms. Miller may write a book about her experiences.

[TheLyle]

A journalist's highest obligation has to be to the truth, otherwise, what's the point?

In all honesty, I think some "journalists" are drawn by the power that journalism can have (look at the adoration for Woodward and Bernstien -- while some journalists admire them for persuing the story to its conclusion, some look up to how their reporting brought down a president). In these oh-damn-Paddy-Chayefsky-was-right days, I think some are drawn to the celebrity of journalism.

IMO, Miller wasn't a journalist in search for the truth. I think she enjoyed being courted by people in power who wanted their perspective put into the national discourse.

[the4thpip]

NEW YORK In a lengthy feature piece on this autumn's Judith Miller saga forthcoming in the January issue of Vanity Fair (on newstands Dec. 13), writer Seth Mnookin covers much familiar ground but also reveals new details and complaints from the reporter's colleagues at The New York Times. Publisher Arthur O. Sulzberger Jr. also gets a good working-over from unnamed in-house critics.

(...)
Elsewhere, Mnookin pulls no punches in stating that over the years Miller "had built a reputation for sleeping with her sources," had dated one of Sulzberger's best friends, Steve Ratner, "and had even, for a time, shared a vacation home with Sulzberger," whatever that means.

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001615297