Wednesday, August 02, 2006
I got your reporter - source privilege RIGHT HERE!!!!
Comments:
Guess we'll see if the ACLU will stand behind the pajamas-wearing crowd or not...
# posted by 
: 7:07 PM
: 7:07 PM
Well, there's np link to the opinion, so the nature and scope of the ruling is not entirely clear. The linked article says that the government wants the video (and, I assume, the videographer's testimony validating it as accurate). What "sources" are protected? Someone taped an event. Whether that was a media person, a blogger, or Joe Public, why shouldn't that record be available as evidence? If someone taped an incident of, say, police brutality, we would want that made available, even if it were the government seeking it to prosecute the cops.
I just don't see video of an event as a 'source' to be protected.
(The linked article suggests that the ACLU is on the case.)
Alene
I just don't see video of an event as a 'source' to be protected.
(The linked article suggests that the ACLU is on the case.)
Alene
# posted by : 9:45 AM
: 9:45 AM
I see the ruling as just the same as the one that put the NYTimes reporter in jail. Good.
LGD
Post a Comment
LGD
# posted by : 11:29 PM
: 11:29 PM
