The editor of The Cleveland Plain Dealer said last night that the newspaper, acting on the advice of its lawyers, was withholding publication of two major investigative articles because they were based on illegally leaked documents and could lead to penalties against the paper and the jailing of reporters. The editor, Doug Clifton, said lawyers for The Plain Dealer had concluded that the newspaper, Ohio's largest daily, would probably be found culpable if the authorities were to investigate the leaks and that reporters might be forced to identify confidential sources to a grand jury or go to jail....read on
I can't even begin to tell you how I feel about this cry baby of an editor. I wonder if he's grandstanding to make a point or just a coward to his profession. " Mr. Clifton declined to provide details about the two investigative articles being withheld, but he characterized them as "profoundly important," adding, "They would have been of significant interest to the public."
If that's the case and they are so important, you owe it to the American people to publish the story. What ever happens, happens. No matter how you feel about the Judith Miller case, If you want to re-establish the importance of an "unafraid" press then PRINT IT.
Cole says: So should you whiners, and if you have information that was leaked to you that are of 'profound importance,' and you don't publish it because you are 'afraid of jail,' you don't deserve my support or sympathy. You deserve my scorn.
Kos Says: NOT a good sign for the future of democracy, folks.
Talk Left says: Newspapers don't actually go to jail. If the reporters are willing to take the heat, the paper should publish the story. What good is freedom of the press if the press is too chicken to exercise its freedom?
Avedon says: This is exactly the kind of chilling effect I was worried about...