'Cause you said December, now I drive alone past your streetβ¦
07.01.2024 14:31 β π 3 π 0 π¬ 0 π 0'Cause you said December, now I drive alone past your streetβ¦
07.01.2024 14:31 β π 3 π 0 π¬ 0 π 0But all of this relies on trust. Do I trust a reporter to not reveal me as a source if a sheβs threatened with jail time? What if sheβs actually sent to jail? How much thatβs a worry depends on the information, but itβs also why we donβt let folks just declare things off the record without a convo.
04.01.2024 21:43 β π 0 π 0 π¬ 0 π 0Itβs a fair point. (A whistleblower calling the paper is different than the scenario you suggested. Itβs just newsier if a lawyer, in a high profile case, is trying to put facts on the record without attribution.)
04.01.2024 21:40 β π 0 π 0 π¬ 0 π 0But the reality is that all this is a matter of conventions, not law. There are no rules carved in stone, and the only punishment for breaking them is that the next person wonβt talk to you. So was this one worth it? Hey, you place your bets and you take your chancesβ¦
04.01.2024 02:46 β π 0 π 0 π¬ 1 π 0But I think journalists report on such negotiations all the time, no? βJohn Doe declined comment.β I myself have used βJohn Doe did not return five phone calls over three days.β (Liked that one.) If a lawyer in a high-profile case calls a journalist as you describe? The call itself is news.
04.01.2024 02:43 β π 0 π 0 π¬ 1 π 0Iβll defend Lieber a little: 1. When I was reporting, I gave more grace to civilians than pros when it came to knowing the rules of attribution. A DOE spox β¦ should know the rules. 2. The content was public record, so it was all a little silly, and nothing confidential was divulged.
03.01.2024 00:28 β π 0 π 0 π¬ 1 π 0