Some journalists dismayed by naming of source

? New York Times reporter Judith Miller’s decision to escape jail by testifying about her conversations with a confidential source surprised some of her supporters and left journalists wondering what her choice will mean for press freedoms.

Miller spent 85 days in jail for initially refusing to tell a grand jury whom she spoke with about Valerie Plame, a covert CIA official whose identity was leaked to several reporters in 2003.

Thursday she was released from prison and a day later gave a grand jury the testimony sought by Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald.

The reason for the abrupt change: Miller said that her source, identified by the Times as Vice President Dick Cheney’s chief of staff, I. Lewis Libby, called her in prison and urged her to break her silence.

News of her release from jail was greeted with joy by some, but also some dismay.

“Miller’s release is obviously good news in itself,” said the press freedom group Reporters Without Borders, “but she recovered her freedom in exchange for naming her source, albeit with the source’s agreement, which means that the principle of the confidentiality of sources, one of the pillars of journalism, has been flouted.”

Lucy Dalglish, executive director of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, praised Miller for her conduct in the case, but predicted its outcome would embolden other prosecutors to investigate press leaks, jailing reporters if necessary.

“This is very dangerous territory,” she said.