:- Journalism by press release is already happening as media outlets routinely reproduce entertainment and software cartel 'statements' as though they’re from reliable sources

But it'll become a reality across the board in the US if two American writers are forced to comply with the demands of special US prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald.

And watching closely is Apple boss Steve Jobs * who, for solely commmercial reasons, is attempting to use US law to force PowerPage, AppleInsider and Think Secret to reveal the identities of confidential sources.

"Journalists are not entitled to promise complete confidentiality - no one in America is,” says Fitzgerald, calling for, “Time magazine reporter Matthew Cooper answer questions about his confidential sources” and again urging a federal judge to “jail him and New York Times reporter Judith Miller if they continue to refuse to comply”.

The quotes are from the San Francisco Chronicle report on the “historic showdown today in federal court between the government and the news media, when [chief US District Judge Thomas] Hogan could order the two reporters confined for defying his October order to cooperate in the grand jury investigation”.

The two journalists refused to testify in a federal investigation of a leak that revealed a covert CIA operative’s identity.

“In a court filing Tuesday, Patrick Fitzgerald said Cooper still must agree to cooperate with prosecutors to avoid jail, even though Time last week turned over notes and e-mails that identify his sources,” says the Chronicle.”

Fitzgerald is “trying to determine whether senior Bush administration officials broke the law by knowingly leaking the identity of covert CIA operative Valerie Plame to reporters as retaliation for an opinion piece written by her husband. Plame's name first appeared in a syndicated column by Robert Novak in July 2003, eight days after her husband, former Ambassador Joseph Wilson IV, accused the administration of twisting intelligence to justify war with Iraq.”

Cooper and Time declined to comment yesterday “on Cooper's intentions, but colleagues said he was still struggling with his decision,” says the story.

“For practical purposes, he cannot protect his sources because his publication has already turned over notes that identify them. But if Cooper cooperates, friends say, he fears his journalistic reputation will be tarnished.”

'No federal press shield law'
It's no accident that "rather than fingering whoever inside the administration broke the law by outing Valerie Plame," the investigation is, "instead putting the squeeze on two news organizations that just happen to have been critical of the Bush administration, Time magazine and The New York Times, and by extension the entire press corps," says the Boston Globe.

"There is no federal press shield law protecting the right of reporters to protect sources, though several states have such laws. And the Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision back in 1972, rejected the contention that the First Amendment implicitly gives reporters immunity from betraying sources," the story says, continuing:

"As a result, reporters remain vulnerable to selective prosecutorial harassment. In the past, the press has taken big risks to pursue the public interest and has resisted prosecutors' demands to betray sources. Some prosecutors and judges have trod lightly, balancing the First Amendment against other public imperatives, though others disdain the idea of journalistic privilege, and some reporters have indeed served time.

"This case is particularly outrageous because a partisan prosecutor is training his guns on the wrong culprits, because the whole affair smells of politics, and because the press as a whole has been far too intimidated instead of standing with the Times and turning a bright spotlight on Fitzgerald and Novak."

=============

* Revision, July 7, 2005: "Actually, No," says a p2pnet reader. "Apple v Does was brought in California state court, where there is already a reporters' shield law. The Plame investigation is taking place in federal court, where no such law exists."

See:-
press release - When 'Spin' means 'distort', p2pnet, July 5, 2005
watching closely - Apple to drop IBM for Intel, p2pnet, June 5, 2005
San Francisco Chronicle - Prosecutor urges judge to jail reporters in CIA leak story, July 6, 2005
refused to testify - Court goes against reporters, p2pnet, February 16, 2005
Boston Globe - Politics taints probe of CIA leak, July 6, 2005