"As we reported, Catherine Herridge was fired from CBS during a bloodbath of them cutting hundreds of employees.
Her firing got the most attention because of her excellence in reporting and the suggestion that it was more than just a layoff when it came to her being let go, just after she'd been reporting on the Hur Report. That suspicion grew louder when it was learned that CBS had also seized Herridge's files, computers, and records, which included her "privileged sources."
"According to George Washington law professor Jonathan Turley:
The timing of Herridge’s termination immediately raised suspicions in Washington. She was pursuing stories that were unwelcomed by the Biden White House and many Democratic powerhouses, including the Hur reporton Joe Biden’s diminished mental capacity, the Biden corruption scandal and the Hunter Biden laptop. She continued to pursue these stories despite reports of pushback from CBS executives, including CBS News President Ingrid Ciprian-Matthews.
"This concerned many that this could "chill" reporting and sources providing information to reporters. Some like Turley and journalist Brit Hume said they had never heard of anything like this before.
"Catherine Herridge has now posted an important update from SAG-AFTRA, which covers broadcast journalists as well as actors. They posted a statement ripping CBS' actions and coming to her defense, demanding that CBS return her files and records to her. They indicated there was progress because of outreach from CBS and they hoped to resolve the question soon. " . . .
SAG-AFTRA strongly condemns CBS News' decision to seize Catherine Herridge's reporter notes and research from her office, including confidential source information. This action is deeply concerning to the union because it sets a dangerous precedent for all media professionals and threatens the very foundation of the First Amendment.
It is completely inappropriate for an employer to lay off a reporter and take the very unusual step of retaining and searching the reporter's files, inclusive of confidential source identification and information. From a First Amendment standpoint, a media corporation with a commitment to journalism calling a reporter’s research and confidential source reporting "proprietary information" is both shocking and absurd.
Continue reading...
No comments:
Post a Comment