Report on this
Re David Shaw’s “Reporters Serve Public Best on the Job -- Not the Stand” (June 27): I’m not a journalist, so I need someone to explain the rules to me.
Locally, reporters demand to see sealed documents in the Michael Jackson and Scott Peterson cases. Nationally, reporters demand to see the minutes of Vice President Cheney’s confidential energy meetings. Journalists argue that a free press is entitled to these things and that the people deserve to know them. Yet, when the proverbial shoe is on the other foot, reporters assert that they should never be compelled to swear in a court of law (i.e. the Lynn Stewart case) that what they have reported is true, and that the attributed quotes are accurate?
It’s not about a reporter revealing his/her sources. It’s not about a reporter giving up research material that was never used in the actual reporting. It’s only about swearing before the court about the truthfulness of what they in fact reported.
Are reporters somehow more special than the rest of us? Are they somehow above the law? I’m so confused.
Greg Strangis
Manhattan Beach
Sign up for Essential California
The most important California stories and recommendations in your inbox every morning.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.
