The Case Against San Francisco Chronicle Reporters Mark Fainaru-Wada and Lance Williams, BALCO and Jail Time
While surfing, I caught an article about the case of San Francisco Chronicle reporters Mark Fainaru-Wada and Lance Williams. If you happen to not know these two men, they are two San Francisco newspaper who wrote the book, "Game of Shadows" that follows the BALCO organization and case, along with career of Barry Bonds and his alleged drug use that helped him approach Hank Aaron's home run record. They have also written numerous articles about the BALCO case which involved such athletes as Jason Giambi, Gary Sheffield, Marion Jones, Tim Montgomery and countless others.
The federal authorities want the two men jailed because they have refused to testify about who leaked them secret grand jury testimony from a doping investigation which supplied their article and book content. According to the AP the article, federal prosecutors told the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that San Francisco Chronicle reporters Mark Fainaru-Wada and Lance Williams should be jailed for up to 18 months for not revealing their sources and the person who gave them grand jury documents and transcripts. Initially, the judge presiding over the case sentenced both men to 18 months in jail unless they revealed their sources, and the San Francisco would be fined $1000 for being in contempt of court, but suspended until a higher court rules.
About this case, my personal opinion is that if a reporter breaks a story of national importance, and as we all know all the BALCO case, then reporters should have every right to keep their sources and inside information under wraps. If every reporter was forced to give up their sources, then any story of importance, whether it be beneficial or scandalous, would never be released at all.
I personally believe the government is out to get these two reporters and to make them an example of how the media can affect and thus should never affect an investigation. Did the government honestly believe no one would find out information about BALCO and it's case considering there were multi-millionaire athletes and icons reported to be involved?
What if Woodward and Bernstein were forced to reveal who"Deep Throat" was? Really, just think would the media be where it is right now, and would both men gone on to have the career they have had? As well, what about whistle-blowers who want to reveal wrongdoing and injustice?
Would we have known about Enron?
This stuff that's happening to these reporters happens in China and Cuba. Should it be happening in the United States of America, the home of the brave and of the free?
To maintain the integrity of the press, sources under no circumstances should ever be revealed. The two reporters may or may not end up losing their freedom, but in the end, it may be a price to pay for the media to be as it is today and for us in America and around the world to be informed.
2 comments:
BALCO is no Watergate. The government was investigating a crime, not covering one up. Sometimes, in order to prosecute a crime, the government makes deals with witnesses to compel their testimony. That's what happened here.
The crime of distributing steroids is more serious to the government than taking steroids. This is why Mark McGwire was not prosecuted in the 1990's, despite the FBI holding evidence against him. They prosecuted his dealer instead.
Now look at this from the other side. What if the government wants to prosecute a case like this again in the future? Will anyone trust the government to maintain the confidentiality of testimony? The reporters, in publishing sealed information, made the work of the government in bringing in drug dealers more difficult. Thanks, guys.
And Deep Throat was not breaking the law. There was no judicial order not to talk to reporters about Watergate. He was exposing a coverup. All these reporters did was help a defense attorney get back at the people who testified against his client. He broke the law and violated his own profession's ethics. While I have sympathy for journalist in these situations in general, I have none for these two in particular.
Thanks for the reply to post, I appreciate it. I'll write up follow-up post to the response after the holidays, since it is so thought provoking to me.
I see the points you are making and they are salient, but I'm going to respectfully disagree with you. Whether what the two reporters did was unethical, illegal or criminal behavior, I think the reporting done in this case served the public very well.
I feel it was important to have this story reported on as the integrity of not only baseball, and perhaps all sports is in question. In today's sporting world, is what we are seeing in terms of performance real or from out of a bottle?
However, I do agree with you about protecting those who testify in cases, and your theory could stretch into example, murder or capital cases.
I think in this instance though, the greater was good served by exposing dirty athletes and their drug gurus, rather than keeping it under wraps.
That being said, thanks so much for the reply, have a great holiday and keep viewing the blog!
Post a Comment