Earlier today on NPR Daniel Schorr provided some commentary on the Wen Ho Lee case which I found to be truly bizarre.
Basically, Schorr seems to accept that:
The Wen Ho Lee Case was bullshit from start to finish
Sources fed multiple news outlets horseshit about Lee and those outlets published it.
All that's fine...but that what does he conclude? That the resolution of the case was scary because it meant that conducting investigative journalism could now become an expensive undertaking due to legal concerns.
Look. Cut the fucking crap already. If your sources feed you horseshit, you are under no obligation to protect them. There is no journalistic principle which says that journalists should be information launderers for those who wish to libel people.
There's a real story about the Wen Ho Lee case. There's a real story about why the government jointly settled with various news organizations to make this story go away. There's a real story about why news organizations were willing to first pay their lawyers and then pay off Lee to allow sources who lied to them to remain anonymous.
There's a story there, and it has nothing to do with protecting sources.
Anyone want to look into it?
