I have previously expressed my view of the meeting ordered by President Barack Obama of Attorney General Eric Holder with representatives of the media. This feeble response was taken in lieu of the more obvious step of firing Holder for his attack on the free press. The proposed meeting was, in my view, an insulting gesture of effectively having Holder investigate Holder. It was made even more transparent by the decision of the Justice Department that the meeting had to be off-the-record. That was too much for two principled media organizations New York Times, CNN, and Associated Press which have refused (correctly) to attend. Sending Holder to such a confab is like Nixon sending G. Gordon Liddy to lead a therapy session of privacy victims. The sole purpose appears to give Obama cover and the appearance of action. However, New York Times executive editor Jill Abramson said that NYT reporters cannot agree to the “off the record” condition. The Associated Press followed suit in refusing to attend. Hopefully others will follow today. The meeting is purportedly designed to explain the Administration’s policy on such seizures of media records and possibly develop new reforms in the future. However, the Administration insists that it was right to target journalists and it is clear that Holder is going to suggest simply new notification or procedural protections rather than establishing a rule barring such seizures in the future. The government has always pursued leakers and whistleblowers within governmental and public channels. However, targeting the reporters crossing the Rubicon in seizing confidential information. While we can continue to debate the constitutionality of such searches (I tend to read the first amendment broadly in protection of the free press), it clearly contravenes longing principles respected by past administrations. Such investigations create a chilling effect on both journalists and sources alike. What is striking is the defense of the White House, which shows a lack of aprpeciation of the most values governing a free press. The White House insists that, since the reporters were not going to be prosecuted, there is no threat to the free press. Such arguments are facially absurd. First, Rosen was officially called a potential criminal co-conspirator in the investigation. Second, the administration was seeking to strip away confidentiality guarantees that reporters need to get information from sources. The distinction being used by the administration suggests that it is either completely clueless about the values of a free press or, more likely, completely disengenous in dealing with this scandal. In my view, attendance at this meeting gives the appearance of legitimacy to this effort and uses media as props in an effort of the Administration to spin the scandal. This rather pathetic meeting with Holder is obviously meant to give cover for the President who continues to express surprise over criticism despite years of criticism over the targeting of both whistleblowers and journalists by his Administration. What do you think? Source: Politico
