Judith Miller was completely unethical in her actions to report on the Valerie Plame affair. When she did her report, she had decided to lie about where she got the source, hence, why she would not give out Scooter Libby's name. In addition to this, she throws up the excuse to manipulate and lie to people she wanted to report about on by saying that it was reporting. However, it is unacceptable to manipulate a person and report about it when the readers would expect a fair, honest, and accurate report that is being presented to them. Moreover, she should not have attempted to be involved in the Valerie Plame affair which resulted in her downfall along with many others. While it's important for journalists to make an interesting story, it's their responsibility to make an article that's fair, honest, and truly accurate.
Although Judith Miller has a good point, as a public journalist speaking of such controversial topic in the media, she should have enough reliable sources to support her argument/issue. Publishing a topic that comes with many arguments, I believe that it is almost common sense for her to be able to justify her sources. Even though Miller was an experienced journalist, refusing to testify her sources makes her a less credible source. Therefore, Judith Miller was unethical in refusing to testify her sources.
I feel like Judith Miller was being unethical with her story because she was only trying to report a story, but did not check up on the information given about her source correctly. Although she still should have conducted more information about what it was she was reporting before using the source, because then the problem could have been avoided. Especially since her topic was so current and important as to have some great sources to back up what she had to about the topic. Although she is a good reporter and she has written many other pieces of work i feel like overlooking her source on such an important topic like weapons of mass destruction makes her story unethical.
It sounds like to me that Miller was honestly reporting her story. She was just using the information that was given to her to make a story. She would listen to the information carefully. She says everybody is wrong if your sources are wrong. That seems like a legitimate statement. You can only do so much if your sources are not telling you the truth. There was no room for manipulation in her case. Honest reporting sounds like it to me. She has been with the New York times for over 20 years. Out of all of the stories she has made in the New York Times she fudges half a dozen stories about Weapons of Mass Destruction. Many agencies got the WMD story wrong as well.
I think Judith Miller sounds like a great reporter with a long successful career and made a simple mistake by believing her source before conducting more investigation on the topic. It became of such controversy only because the topic was so important and so prevalent to today's society-finding weapons capable of mass destruction.
Email addresses are required but never displayed.
On The Media is funded, in part, by the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation,
the Overbrook Foundation and the Jane Marcher Foundation.