Oh, the heady days of 2002 when you could celebrate the courageous stand of whistleblowers and celebrate their "American courage and American values." Remember that, Time Magazine? Now instead you are widely vilified for compromising journalistic integrity, bending to government pressure, selling out to corporate interests, and undermining the confidence of potential Deep Throats everywhere, thus ensuring that the evil secrets of the government remain unexposed. Way to go.

In Sunday's NYT, Frank Rich wonders "What high-level source would risk talking to Time about governmental corruption after this cave-in? What top investigative reporter would choose to work there?"

In David Carr's column in today's NYT, Time Inc. editor Norman Pearlstine doth protest:

The case itself, as he points out, is not a particularly noble one. "We were not dealing with a whistle-blower here that was in need of protection," he said.

Perhaps this episode will only serve to shore up the resolve of journalists to keep sources sacrosanct, and may even result in that shield law everyone's got their fingers crossed for. Hope springs eternal. But either way it's a shame to go from a publication that celebrates whistleblowers for having the guts to speak out to one that doesn't even have the guts to stand up for them.

We're Not in Watergate Anymore [NYT]
A Tough Call, and Then Consequences [NYT]
The Truth vs. The Dollar [Businessweek]

Related:
Federal Shield for journalists is no panacea [WSJ]