Washington Post ombud takes on unnamed sources
The Washington Post ombudsman is taking his paper to task for overusing unnamed sources as well:
The Post has strict rules on the use of anonymous sources. They’re spelled out in detail — more than 3,000 words — in its internal stylebook.But some of those lofty standards are routinely ignored. Others are unevenly applied. And despite the importance of those standards, many Post staffers lack a thorough knowledge of the policies and confess they haven’t reviewed them in years.
News organizations can pay dearly if they’re not vigilant about sourcing. At minimum, credibility can suffer. At worst, a damaging journalistic transgression can occur.
Anonymous sources are critical to newsgathering — and to informing readers. Without a guarantee of confidentiality, many sources wouldn’t share sensitive information on corruption or misconduct.
But anonymity can be overused and abused. Sources can make false or misleading assertions with impunity. Journalists can inflate a source’s reliability or even fabricate his or her existence.
Read the rest.
Related posts:
- Unnamed sourcing and the media shield law Click here to read my interview with an outfit called...
- Using Anonymous Sources Harms Credibility of News Industry New research shows unnamed sourcing lowers credibility for readers: “Readers...
- Shameless acts of unnamed sourcing The New York Times ombudsman takes on his own paper...
- Anonymous sources and personal allegations The New York Times Public Editor points out that the...
- Terrible unnamed sourcing Terrible unnamed sourced reporting: Memphis will have a new coach...
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.
