Time Inc. Statement on Handing Over Documents

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: Richard Forno <rforno () infowarrior org>
Date: June 30, 2005 9:47:26 PM EDT
To: Infowarrior List <infowarrior () g2-forward org>
Cc: Dave Farber <dave () farber net>
Subject: Time Inc. Statement on Handing Over Documents


Time Inc. Statement on Handing Over Documents
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/30/politics/30text-time.html? 
pagewanted=print

Following is a statement from Norman Pearlstine, Editor in Chief of Time
Inc., regarding the decision to hand over documents in the  
investigation of
the leak of a C.I.A. operative's name.

"The First Amendment guarantees freedom of the press, including the  
right to
gather information of interest to the public and, where necessary, to
protect the confidentiality of sources.

Time Inc. believes in that guarantee. That is why we have supported  
from the
outset the efforts of Time magazine reporter Matt Cooper in resisting  
the
Special Counsel's attempts to obtain information regarding Mr. Cooper's
confidential sources. Time Inc. and Mr. Cooper have fought this case  
all the
way from the district court to the Supreme Court of the United States.

In this particular case, where national security and the role of a grand
jury have been at issue, the Supreme Court chose to let stand the  
district
court's order requiring Time Inc. and Mr. Cooper to comply with the  
Special
Counsel's subpoenas. It did so after the United States Court of  
Appeals for
the District of Columbia affirmed that order.

In declining to review the important issues presented by this case, we
believe that the Supreme Court has limited press freedom in ways that  
will
have a chilling effect on our work and that may damage the free flow of
information that is so necessary in a democratic society. It may also
encourage excesses by overzealous prosecutors.

It is unfortunate that the Supreme Court has left uncertain what  
protections
the First Amendment and the federal common law provide journalists  
and their
confidential sources.

It is also worth noting that many foreign governments, including China,
Venezuela, and Cameroon, to name a few, refer to U.S. contempt  
rulings when
seeking to justify their own restrictive press laws.

Despite these concerns, Time Inc. shall deliver the subpoenaed  
records to
the Special Counsel in accordance with its duties under the law. The  
same
Constitution that protects the freedom of the press requires  
obedience to
final decisions of the courts and respect for their rulings and  
judgments.
That Time Inc. strongly disagrees with the courts provides no  
immunity. The
innumerable Supreme Court decisions in which even Presidents have  
followed
orders with which they strongly disagreed evidences that our nation  
lives by
the rule of law and that none of us is above it.

We believe that our decision to provide the Special Prosecutor with the
subpoenaed records obviates the need for Matt Cooper to testify and
certainly removes any justification for incarceration.

Time Inc.'s decision doesn't represent a change in our philosophy,  
nor does
it reflect a departure from our belief in the need for confidential  
sources.
It does reflect a response to a profound departure from the practice of
federal prosecutors when this case is compared with other landmark cases
involving confidentiality over the past 30 years. Since the days of  
Attorney
General John Mitchell, the Justice Department has sought confidential
sources from reporters as a last resort, not as an easy option. Neither
Archibald Cox, the Watergate Special Prosecutor, nor Judge John Sirica
sought to force the Washington Post or its reporters to reveal the  
identity
of "Deep Throat," the prized confidential source.




-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as lists-ip () insecure org
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/