more on NYT: U.S. Wins Access to Reporter Phone Records

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: "Brock N. Meeks" <bmeeks () cox net>
Date: August 2, 2006 6:17:46 PM EDT
To: dave () farber net
Subject: Re: [IP] NYT: U.S. Wins Access to Reporter Phone Records

Hail hardy and good f-ing luck to the Feds.

As a reporter I when dealing with sensitive sources I NEVER called  
them on a
phone that could be traced to them or myself nor would I ever have  
them call
me on a phone that could be traced back to them.

And here I'm talking about sources that handling information that was
classified or "hot" in some big way; not talking about a congressional
staffer or agency employee leaking me a draft copy of a GAO report or
something like that.

I would instruct sources, either during face to face meetings or  
"talking"
to a group of potential sources (like law enforcement) in an electronic
forum, to buy phone cards and make calls to me from public phones or  
from
disposable cell phones.

I had more than two dozen Federal Air Marshals as sources and they all
communicated with me using phone cards.

Yes, all very James Bond, to be sure.  But for years I was afraid  
that just
this sort of thing might happen one day, either legally or illegally.

I know several other reporters that operate like this as well.

--Brock


On 8/2/06 5:28 PM, "David Farber" <dave () farber net> wrote:

> Begin forwarded message:
>
> From: Brad Malin <b.malin () vanderbilt edu>
> Date: August 2, 2006 2:15:42 PM EDT
> To: David Farber <dave () farber net>
> Subject: NYT: U.S. Wins Access to Reporter Phone Records
>
> If I was going to be a confidential source, I would do so through an
> encrypted channel.
>
> -brad
>
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/02/washington/02phones.html
>
> U.S. Wins Access to Reporter Phone Records
>
> By ADAM LIPTAK
> Published: August 2, 2006
>
> A federal prosecutor may inspect the telephone records of two New
> York Times
> reporters in an effort to identify their confidential sources, a  
> federal
> appeals court in New York ruled yesterday.
>
> The 2-to-1 decision, from a court historically sympathetic to claims
> that
> journalists should be entitled to protect their sources, reversed a
> lower
> court and dealt a further setback to news organizations, which have
> lately
> been on a losing streak in the federal courts.
>
> The dissenting judge said that the government had failed to
> demonstrate it
> truly needed the records and that efforts to obtain reporters’ phone
> records
> could alter the way news gathering was conducted.
>
> <snip>
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------
> You are subscribed as bmeeks () cox net
> To manage your subscription, go to
> http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
>
> Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting- 
> people/



-------------------------------------
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/