San Fran Chronicle reporters probably will have to give up sources ...

in the Bonds case. What a fucking joke.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/08/05/MNG21KBVH01.DTL

paging Judy Miller ...

 

Yeah, Supreme Court rulings that the judge has to abide by are "a fucking joke."

And you do realize Judy's star fell quite a bit later in that turn of events, don't you?

 

Yes, I do.

Judy Miller was writing about national security. It's understandable for the judge to make her reveal the sources. The Barry Bonds case? Umm, no.

Writers are not thrilled by this judge's ruling.

 

Again, you must have missed the part where the Supreme Court already ruled on this sort of thing. If you think the court is just going to wink at people obtaining sealed grand jury testimony, then not saying how they got it, you're in for a rude awakening.

Generally this matter is covered early in any journalism program or law program.

 

Well rudely awake me, then. I still believe this is bullshit.

Sorry, no law classes or J-school for me.

So if you're the reporters, do you go to jail, or reveal the sources?

 

Knock me over with a feather.

 

Shocked. People care more about my opinion than a story that figures to be prominent on Sports Reporters sunday, and papers everywhere Monday morning.

 

I don't really care about it. I'm just saying there are facts, and the facts are the Supreme Court already issued a ruling on this type of thing.

So unless the defendants want to work their way slowly through the court system, step by step, inch by inch, likely serving jail time until they reach the Supreme Court, then they'll have to cough up a name.

 

The title of this thread is flawed. It should be: "Court will probably compel reporters to give up sources." Because you can bet Williams and Fainaru-Wada are not going to cough up any names, unless those sources come forward on their own. And if the SF Chronicle duo does go to jail, they will have the support of 95 percent of fellow media members.

 

Who apparently didn't pay attention in the aforementioned introductory journalism/law course.

 

I remember the part about protecting your sources, and independent, investigative reporting requiring said annonymous sources, so if you have to go to jail to protect them, so be it.

 

They are sports guys.

They will roll like a couple of Firestones.