Outgoing Prez Says SPJ Did the Right Thing By Awarding Miller

By: Joe Strupp The outgoing president of the Society of Professional Journalists said he did not regret the organization's move to give controversial New York Times reporter Judith Miller its First Amendment Award despite the onslaught of criticism it has prompted.

"I think some of it is par for the course," said Irwin Gratz, who handed over his presidency during SPJ's three-day Las Vegas convention that ended Tuesday. "All the heat forced us to think about [Miller's award] and the more I thought about it, the more I am convinced we did the right thing."

Gratz cited the attention Miller had put on the ongoing push for a federal shield law, which continued Wednesday with Miller testifying before a congressional committee that is considering the law.

SPJ honored Miller on Tuesday with the award, which it had originally decided to give her in July after she was forced into jail for refusing to reveal her confidential source in the Valerie Plame case. Last month, Miller cut a deal with federal prosecutors and her source, White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, to reveal his identity and testify to a limited scope of questions.

SPJ officials had stressed Monday that Miller's honor was strictly for her actions in protecting a source and should not be viewed as a "lifetime achievement award" or any commentary on other aspects of her work. She has drawn criticism for her reluctance to cooperate with Times reporters who published a story about her this past weekend and for her past mistakes in reporting on weapons of mass destruction in Iraq that prompted an unusual Times editor's note in 2004.

Opposition to SPJ's actions mounted in recent days, with groups that included Fairness and Accuracy in Media (FAIR) slamming the idea. "By rewarding a reporter who was apparently collaborating with and protecting a powerful official in an effort to punish the free speech of a government critic, the SPJ is undermining, not advancing, the principles of the First Amendment," FAIR said in a statement.

In a related move, SPJ delegates passed several resolutions during the convention, including three related to Miller and confidential sourcing. In one resolution, the nearly 200 delegates voted to remove language that highlighted some of Miller's mistakes.

"It made for an interesting little debate for about 25 minutes," Gratz said of the decision to remove two sections of the resolution promoting the need for a federal shield law. "Ultimately they felt that the issues [of Miller and the shield law] were separate."

One deleted section noted that "coverage by Judith Miller and other journalists of supposed weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, using anonymous sources that proved to be wrong, is part of a continuing debate over a major question of public policy." Another said "Miller's case underscores the danger of excessive willingness to grant confidentiality and to mischaracterize the nature of confidential sources, thus allowing such sources to hide possible motives and manipulate public opinion."

"From my recollection of the discussion, the delegates spoke about focusing the resolution on the issue of journalism and anonymous sources instead of an individual," explained SPJ Spokeswoman Julie Grimes.

Gratz agreed, adding, "the issue of supporting a federal shield law and what anyone might think of Judy Miller are separate. Some people may have questions about Miller, but that has nothing to do with our support of a federal shield law."

Gratz said the decision to remove the language was not an attempt to muzzle criticism of Miller. "At this point in time, some of that muddies the water," Gratz said about mentioning Miller's mistakes. "What we wanted to say was that she resisted the subpoena and was willing to go to jail and those were the right things to do."