Reporters are not above the law

When newpapers use "unidentified sources" in reporting on issues critical to national security they should not be protected by so called "Shield Laws", which allow them to keep the identities of their sources secret, even fron Grand Jury investigations into the leaks. This issue has been in the news alot lately, with the identity of "Deep Throat" (the vietnam era jerk who leaked secrets about Nixon's white house) being made public, and with the investigation into who "leaked" the fact that Valerie Plame, wife of national disgrace Joseph Wilson (a current jerk who lied about Bush during the election cycle last year), was a CIA agent.

This is a controversial issue which should be discussed publicly, so here's my two cents worth.

I read this New York Times article yesterday, about the Cleveland Plain Dealer not publishing an "important" story, because their lawyers say they will have to reveal their source or go to jail. It seems that the media types think the main point of all this is "If newspapers are afraid to report stories because they may go to jail, the public suffers" I think the main point is........If the story is SO IMPORTANT to the public, and the "source" is going to LEAK NATIONAL SECRETS, then why won't they do it publicly? If someone in the government does something wrong, why not speak out? If telling your story means leaking secrets and you arn't brave enough to do it publicly, then don't do it. I think newsrooms around the country should be asking themselves "What axe does this person have to grind" before they go public with secrets.

Personally, I wouldn't print something unless the "source" was willing to go public, at least where national security is concerned.