We got a request a few days ago from a law-enforcement agency to use some photos from our archive. They wanted to post them as part of an investigation. We declined.
This wasn’t out of spite or a desire not to help. We just don’t think that is the best way we can help. A newspaper functions best as an independent organization, a watchdog, rather than as an agent of the state. Once, we start turning over our files to public agencies, we’ve given up that independence and the freedom that comes with just having a note pad and a penchant for asking questions.
This ties back to some extent to the Judith Miller case of last year and a more recent one involving the SEC and a reporter’s notes. The Miller case was to a large extent about confidential sources, but it’s also about government agencies trying to get the media to help them do their jobs.
The way we help is simple. We write stories. Then public officials can read them and decide what to do.
One more thing: Wake Forest may not be winning a lot of games, but you gotta love their understanding of world events. Only Skip Prosser would use the phrase causi belli in a quote. Not to be outdone, Eric Williams gives a nice summation of European history with this quip: “Coach always talks about me being selfish, but at the same time I’m not going to be stupid. I’m not going to try to fight my way through the Russian Army.”
Your host is Ken Otterbourg, the managing editor at the Winston-Salem Journal. It's a forum to discuss the media, from
I understand your (the Journal’s) hesitancy to hand over the photos. We all have purpose when we write. But what of rights here? I mean: Blogging is breaking ground. And having said that, would I have to get permission to say it again? Who own the copyright to comments on this blog, the Journal or the writer (commenter)? What about photos shared in the project you mention in “Point, shoot and chat”?Something to think about before writing something profound or posting a prize-winning photo.
Generally speaking, what’s posted on this blog or elsewhere on JournalNow is the property of the Web site. It’s essentially the equivalent of a published letter to the editor in the sense that it doesn’t really exist in the public domain until we post or publish it. The legal languge is in our terms and conditions at the very bottom of this page. As far as photos go, the whole concept of that project is about sharing photos, not selling them. This site in general is about building a community, which is a long-term activity, rather than selling the pieces, which is short-term and, for our interest, short-sighted.
Post a comment
Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.