Welcome to SPJ Blogs Sign in | Join | Help

Secret Senator Unmasked

The efforts of dozens of volunteers to call their Senators to find out who put the hold on the Open Government Act worked. The secret senator revealed himself today thanks to SPJ's efforts and a number of bloggers who took an interest in this issue. U.S. Sen. Jon Kyl of Arizona was forced into the open by SPJ's crowdsourcing efforts.

Kudos to our President Christine Tatum, who applied appropriate pressure of her own, for getting behind the major effort and  for correctly guessing who the culprit would be.

This shows what power 9,000 members can have when it is working together.

 

 

Published Thursday, May 31, 2007 7:09 PM by DaveAeikens

Comments

# re: Secret Senator Unmasked

Friday, June 01, 2007 11:47 PM by Robert M Kraus Sr

Oh how journalists berate secrecy by others.  However, jounalists would rather go to jail than reveal the source of their news.  The height of hypocrisy was reached by Christine Tatum when she labeled Senator Kyl 'senator secrecy.

R M Kraus   Akron Ohio

# re: Secret Senator Unmasked

Tuesday, June 05, 2007 3:07 PM by christinetatum
I received this note from Mr. Kraus and responded via e-mail that we'll just have to agree to disagree on this matter. Journalists may work on behalf of the public, but they are not public officials elected to conduct the people's business as transparently as possible. Big distinction to be made there.

# Attorney

Wednesday, June 06, 2007 11:22 AM by G. Douglas Abrams
i read with great amusment and interest, charles Davis' column regarding the outing of Senator Kyle. Please dont misunderstand, i agree entirely with the notion of openness in government, and agree entirely with the premis of the article.
What i find amusing, and annoying, is the hypocrisy by the author and spj. Journalists, whatever that term means, are in favor of opennes and following laws, so long as they are exempt therefrom.
Suppose, a staffer of Sen. Kyle called SPJ to out the Senator, and in doing so, broker a federal statute. At that very moment, the jouranlist would employ his own standard of secrecy and deny any court of the name of the outer. so much for openness.
As a lawyer, i get such priviliges, and may agree that other professionals should be afforded similar protections. However, journalists dont fall into the category nor any definition of "professionals".
No ethics are mandated to be followed by spj, nor any other body politic or otherwise, rather they are completly vounltary. No praticular eduction is requuired. No test is necessary to become a journalist. No certification, no continuing education, no standard whatsoever. It is my understanding that Journalists themselves will not limit by definition what constitutes a journalists.
By this standard, pray tell what is wrong wtih this notion: Scooter Libby, when asked who first told him the name, Valerie Playe, responds: Gosh, i would really enjoy shedding light on that topic, but you see, a few years ago, i wrote a regular column that was printed in my hometown newspaper, and at that moment i became a journalist and, still considering myself a journalist, i do not find it necessary to reveal my sources. Well.
Anonymous comments are disabled. Please log in or create an account to comment on this article.