Off the Record: Time Editor in Chief Discusses
CIA Identity Leak Case
By Ioana Patringenaru | February 21, 2006
 |
| Norman Pearlstine, former editor in chief of Time Inc. spoke at UCSD Thursday. |
|
On the record, off the record, on deep background, not for attribution: What does it all mean anyway? And do reporters have a legal right to keep their sources anonymous?
Time Inc.’s former Editor in Chief Norman Pearlstine tried to explain it all Thursday night at UCSD. The answers aren’t easy, he admits. Protecting anonymous sources is important. Without them, big stories like Watergate wouldn’t have happened, Pearlstine said.
“You don’t go back on your word,” he said. “It’s just something you don’t do.”
And yet, Pearlstine had to take a hard look at this issue in 2004, when Time Inc. became embroiled in one of the biggest fights between the press, the judiciary and the White House. A federal grand jury subpoenaed reporters, including Time’s White House correspondent Matt Cooper, to find out who anonymously leaked to the media the identity of a CIA agent, Valerie Plame. Plame is married to Joseph Wilson, a former diplomat and a vocal critic of the White House’s claims about intelligence regarding Iraq’s nuclear capabilities. The investigation led to the indictment of Lewis Libby, then Vice President Cheney’s chief of staff. Pearlstine said that Bush adviser Karl Rove also might be indicted.
WATCH TIME INC.’S FORMER EDITOR IN CHIEF ON UCSD-TV
Norman Pearlstine’s talk will air:
March 6 at 8 p.m.
March 7 at 10 p.m.
March 10 at 6:30 p.m.
March 12 at 8 p.m.
March 28 at 10 p.m.
March 31 at 7 p.m.
April 2 at 10 p.m.
For more information: www.ucsd.tv |
|
The article that started it all for Pearlstine didn’t even run in Time magazine. It only appeared on the magazine’s Web site. In fact, Pearlstine said he considered the Plame story business as usual.
“The one thing that people in Washington do is talk off the record and trash everyone else,” he said.
News organizations initially fought the subpoenas. Then the Supreme Court refused to review a federal court order asking Time Inc. to produce documents in the case. Pearlstine decided to turn over the documents, a controversial decision that was criticized by many journalists. An editorial cartoon in the San Diego Union-Tribune bestowed upon him the title of “wimp of the year,” he said with a smile.
Thursday at UCSD, Pearlstine said he took the decision unilaterally, without consulting the corporate side of Time Inc. or its parent company, Time Warner. He said he was worried that a court would hold his organization in criminal contempt.
“An individual reporter has a right to civil disobedience,” he said. “It’s less clear to me that a corporation has a right of civil disobedience, particularly a publicly-held corporation.”
It also seemed important that the investigation was looking into potential felonies committed by officials high up in the Bush administration, he said. The motives of Cooper’s sources also seemed questionable. Basically, spin doctors were trying to discredit a whistle blower, Pearlstine said. Also, Cooper had disclosed the name of his anonymous sources to some of his colleagues and in e-mails.
Finally, case law didn’t seem to give news organizations a right to ignore Supreme Court rulings and refuse to disclose the identity of their anonymous sources, Pearlstine said. He added he supports a federal shield law that would allow reporters to refuse to testify.
Pearlstine is working on a book titled “Off the Record: The Use and Misuse of Anonymous Sources,” which has yet to be published. He will donate his portion of royalties to nonprofit organizations that support journalists and journalism.
“I think he’s an incredibly intelligent man,” senior Pamela Lin said of Pearlstine after the talk. It was interesting to find out what lies behind news stories, she added
Pearlstine’s talk was part of the Helen Edison Lecture Series, the result of a major gift from the late Helen Edison, a prominent San Diego philanthropist.
|
