How do we feel about the Chron guys now?

Nothing new but it does reinforce the point I've made over and over: this sad little episode would hurt more than help reporters' efforts for a federal shield law. Now, I think we should get back to the duel between Ragu and Creamora to settle the dispute. Creamora kicked digital sand in his face by calling him a stringbean then Ragu challenged him to a physical contest -- weight-lifting or running. That's a lot more exciting than a rehash of the thread.

 

Ragu, it's up to you.

 

My tshirt says 'Sportswriters for Freedom of the Press'....and I do wear it with great pride. Unless you can find fault with that message, so should everyone.

 

21,

There more important questions than do I "support the message on your T-shirt." Do you fully support the "double dip" investigative technique of Mark Fainaru-Wada after he knew full well that his source was repeatedly committing criminal acts? Do you support selling information for profit to a book publisher that was provided to you by someone who broke the law by doing so? Do you support that fact that the two Chronicle reporters helped a criminal to commit fraud upon a federal court?

creamora

 

That was the question you asked, if I wore it with pride; I answered you.

I support the theory that we don't know all the details, and that the reporters and the Chron probably acted within some boundaries that seemed clear and reasonable to them at that time.

Absolutely. It's not a crime to possess the information, and it's not a crime to report it. If it was wrong or unethical to write books using sources that broke the law or acted unethically, you could use the libraries for bowling alleys.

And by the way, newspapers publish for profit.

I don't support any journalist or newspaper helping anyone to commit a fraud upon a federal court. I repeat my earlier response, that we don't know the whole story, and perhaps never will.

More than anything, though, as much as I wish we DID know the whole story, I support the reporters' and the Chron's right to stay silent on this.....the same way I support your right to come to this message board and make broad and defamatory accusations under the veil of anonymity. Freedom of speech for everyone, sir.

 

Wow. Seriously? That makes their questionable techniques OK? That buys them a pass for being played by a source who was unscrupulous at best?

 

Wingman, I'm not being rude, but this thread has gone on for 24 pages, with much of that debate buried all over the place. I can't go through it all again. My bottom line is that I don't know....Creamora doesn't know (no, stop it, you just don't), and probably no one but the reporters and the Chron know for sure why they made those decisions.

As kindred has pointed out here numerous times, there were likely other sources that might have lessened the impact of the Ellerman leak. I don't believe this is all about Ellerman. And I for sure don't believe that what's been 'reported' on this thread constitutes a factual account of what happened.

So again (God, I am becoming Ragu), I'm not going to to judge what I don't fully understand. Why would you?

 

I'll admit I've been avoiding slogging through this entire thread, as the very idea gives me a headache. So I'll withdraw my argument.

 

I wonder if Ragu and 21 should start dating. That way they can sit around talk about this at length.
Personally this is one of those stories that is a pretty big deal now, but, in the future, will be an even bigger deal. Mostly because of the tactics used by the reporters and editors involved and will be a real headscratcher for future journalism students.
I can envision the debate...
Student: I'm a little confused by 2006 and 2007 in our historical studies
Prof: Go ahead
Student: So the reporter who paid $2,000 to a source gets an ethics award. The paper who commited fraud on a federal court was honored and other journalists rallied to the defense of the reporters who did the deed. But a Pulitzer-Prize winning reporter gets suspended and taken off his beat because he parked for free, in a free parking lot, and another editor quits because he is dating a girl, who helps someone else do some work for a movie producer.
Prof: It was an odd time.