After all, Sanford is a friend of journalism, a knowledgeable friend who has seen a lot from inside the legal system. His wakeup call cannot be dismissed out of hand by any journalists who consider themselves objective. As effective as the early parts of the book are, the later parts are more effective still. Insights invaluable Sanford has been defense attorney in some of that litigation. His insights based on his litigation experience are treasures.
Journalists win far more cases than they lose.
Sanford marshals adverse decision after decision so that it is difficult to deny an anti-journalism atmosphere among lots of juries and judges, not to mention plaintiffs. Sanford has no intention of asking journalists to bridge the canyon of distrust by distributing bland news meant to offend no one. He wants journalists to continue their quest for wrongdoing. But he wants them to moderate their style. First Amendment freedoms should not depend so much on the public's approval of the press' work or on the press performing public service as on the recognition that as awful as they may behave at times, we are much better off relying on them than on government for their liberties,'' Sanford says.