Was ID'ing CIA Agent Unethical?

By: Joe Strupp As the Justice Department investigates who leaked the identity of a CIA agent to columnist Robert Novak and perhaps five other journalists, ethical questions have arisen over whether Novak should have printed the name. Experts also wonder if the reporters who didn't publish the leak should have reported the leaker to federal authorities, and if the agent's identity has any news value anyway.

Although Novak's column -- which disclosed the identity of CIA operative Valerie Plame -- ran more than two months ago, it drew new attention this week after U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft announced that a federal investigation had begun into finding the Bush administration officials who reportedly disclosed her identity to Novak. In his column, Novak discussed the work of retired diplomat Joseph C. Wilson, Plame's husband, and reported that "two senior administration officials" had revealed her identity to Novak.

Newspaper veterans and journalistic observers disagreed over whether Novak's actions crossed any ethical or legal line, with most defending his reporting as good shoe-leather newspapering, while others claim he stepped over a boundary.

"It was and is unethical to finger somebody in intelligence, particularly when that person has nothing to do with the issue -- she was simply a sacrificial lamb," said Orville Schell, dean of the Graduate School of Journalism at the University of California, Berkeley. "[Novak] will probably hide behind some ethical flack jacket. But that [shield] law is not designed to protect the White House."

Others said Novak had the right to publish Plame's identity. "It was a heck of a story," said George Harmon, associate professor at the Medill School of Journalism at Northwestern University. "I assume he thought it through and we don't know that that endangered her. It could be justified based on the news value." Marc Sandalow, a 10-year Washington correspondent for the San Francisco Chronicle, agreed. "I don't blame Novak," he said. "He should not get into trouble."

Doyle McManus, Washington bureau chief for the Los Angeles Times, also supported Novak's right to report the information, but questioned its relevance to the story. "I think it was a peculiar fact to report because it didn't seem to have any significance," he said. "We normally accede to the government's request not to print the identity of a CIA operative, but I can see reasons why we would break that rule."

When asked about those reporters who chose not to report Plame's identity, most said they showed good journalistic judgment and should not be criticized for failing to report the alleged leaks by the administration.

"It is not unusual for journalists to have names of people in some sort of secret activity and not identify them," said Aly Colon, an ethics instructor at The Poynter Institute. "It could mean anything, from this is not a story to a concern about the consequences."

MacManus agreed. "I think I would have done what they did," he said about the other reporters, "unless I found some way that it was relevant to disclose [her identity]." He also defended the reporters who did not report that such leaking was going on. "It's not our job," McManus said. "It is the job of the government to police its employees -- not the job of the media."

Schell disagreed. "If there is fault to be portioned to the media, it was to those who named names," he said. But he added that the reporters who didn't reveal Plame's identity should have reported on the attempted leaks. "This administration -- so opposed to leaking -- was itself involved in leaks," Schell said.