 |
| ||||||
News Business Sports Entertainment Tropical Life City Guide Shop Local Classifieds Jobs Cars Homes  |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
|
Infomaniac: WeBlog
Thursday, July 28, 2005
Reaction
The Arthur Teele story has been raising a lot of questions in journalism circles; there are several postings and letters on the Romenesko site, for example. Now some journalists have set up an online petition in support of Jim DeFede.
And, some readers are upset about this story, too. Note this comment was added to the last post:
In all the discussions about whether what DeFede did was legal or not, there is disagreement. The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press has a guide, called Can We Tape? which lays out the law on taping in each state. But there seems to be a dispute even over whether the RCFP's account is accurate. This seems to be a case where expressing one's personal opinion isn't going to add much. posted by liz at 7:18 PM 
Comments:
DeFede's taping of the conversation being legal or not is beside the point. If Teele stated during the conversation "speaking off the record" then Defede's taping of the conversation was unethical.
It really doesnt matter if DeFede fessed up to Herald editors. The fact that he recorded a conversation made in confidence was wrong. Teele had a reasonable expectation of privacy by speaking off the record. # posted by
 : 11:01 AM
Re: the off the record question, nevermind, Val is right. The statement from publisher Jesús Díaz Jr.does say this: "Díaz said the police had requested that The Herald turn over DeFede's tape as part of their investigation of the suicide. The newspaper has refused because The Herald doesn't turn over unpublished notes and Teele had requested that the conversation be off the record, he said.
Post a Comment
|
|
|
|
