Press outrage greets jailing of New York Times reporter

The jailing Wednesday of a New York Times reporter for contempt marked a dark day for press freedom, a perversion of justice and sent a chilling message, according to editors and media watchdogs. Judith Miller was sent to prison for refusing to name the source who outed a CIA agent in a case which morphed into a historic showdown between the courts and the press.
A second journalist, Time's Matthew Cooper, also initially refused to testify, but his source dramatically released him from his confidentiality pledge to allow him to testify to a federal probe into the case.
"It is tragic that, in pursuit of offences real or imagined, a federal prosecutor sees fit to imprison a journalist who is simply doing her job and adhering to the basic ethical principles of her profession," said Rick Dunham, president of Washington's National Press Club.
"It is a sad perversion of justice to send Judith Miller to jail for protecting a confidential source in a case where no crime has yet been alleged and no story was ever written by Ms Miller."
Miller researched the case but did not actually write an article on it. Reporters Without Borders said the judgement was a "dark day for freedom of the press in the United States and around the world."
"This unprecedented sentence against a journalist who was merely exercising her professional prerogative is a serious violation of international law, a dangerous precedent, and the United States has sent a very bad signal to the rest of the world."
Lucy Dalglish, executive director of the US-based Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, said she was not surprised Miller was sent to jail for contempt of court. But she said he was disturbed that Judge Thomas Hogan who handed down the verdict, also appeared to be considering further charges on top of civil contempt of court.
"I am disappointed at the judge suggested that he was mulling in his head obstruction of justice charges," Dalglish said.
Arthur Sulzberger Jr., chairman of The New York Times Company praised his reporter for standing up for journalistic principle.
"There are times when the greater good of our democracy demands an act of conscience," Sulzberger said in a statement.