Tuesday, October 11, 2005

NYT mum on Miller

The Editor and Publisher questions why Judith Miller has received such meager coverage from her own newspaper since the reporter was released from jail:

NEW YORK In the 11 days since Judith Miller left jail after agreeing to testify before a federal grand jury about her sources, many of the facts in the case have yet to come out. But one thing is clear: Her newspaper, The New York Times, has had very little to say about her role in the Plame/CIA leak case, and has been regularly scooped by other papers on the latest twists in her involvement.

The newspaper promised a full accounting by now, but then put it off after Miller was told she had to chat with the federal prosecutor again, on Tuesday. Executive Editor Bill Keller was quoted in an online Business Week article Monday suggesting that the complexities of the situation put the paper in the "uncomfortable" position of not being able to share important information Miller knows.

I'm not sure what is meant here by "chat with the federal prosecutor" but from my understanding of the grand jury process, there is nothing stopping Miller from disclosing to the public what was said during her testimony. Only the jurors themselves are bound to secrecy.

Comments from the editor of the Cleveland Plain Dealer seem to back this up:

"What bothers me is that they have been quiet about it since she got out of jail, not sharing with the readers anything," says Doug Clifton, editor of The Plain Dealer in Cleveland. "Once she was out, they owed it to readers to share what she testified. She ought to have shared with readers what she shared with the grand jury."

Miller to Talk to Prosecutor Again Tuesday, As Some Editors Question 'NY Times' Coverage of Her Case

Technorati Tags: , , ,