Reporters and Their Sources in a Maelstrom

Network News

X Profile
View More Activity
Monday, July 11, 2005

It is obvious that columnist Robert D. Novak knows the names of his two sources referred to in his column "outing" the identity of a CIA covert operative [op-ed, July 14, 2003].

Mr. Novak reportedly testified before a grand jury. There are but two possible results:

One, he revealed the names of his two sources, who should then be investigated and possibly prosecuted for violating U.S. law.

Or, two, he refused to identify his two sources, in which case he should be held in contempt of court and sent to jail until he gives up their names.

Yet it has been New York Times reporter Judith Miller and Time correspondent Matthew Cooper who faced imprisonment -- and Ms. Miller is now behind bars -- while Mr. Novak, who probably has the information sought by the U.S. prosecutor, has faced no such threat.

MARK HOPKINS

Washington

ยท

Many people seem to think that Judith Miller has been defending a whistle-blower's attempt to unearth corruption, mismanagement and fraud in refusing to reveal her sources [front page, July 7]. I'd be behind her if that were the case.

Private individuals, even government employees, frequently come into possession of information that, when revealed, could clean up our government or some other corrupt entity. Anonymity is often the only way the information can be revealed in safety and exposure brought about.


CONTINUED     1           >

More Washington Post Opinions

PostPartisan

Post Partisan

Quick takes from The Post's opinion writers.

Washington Sketch

Washington Sketch

Dana Milbank writes about political theater in the capital.

Tom Toles

Tom Toles

See his latest editorial cartoon.

© 2005 The Washington Post Company

Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity