The Flint Journal editor used his Sunday column to wring his hands about the anonymous posters on the newspaper's website. Much of what he wrote, I agree with.
Anonymous sources should be used carefully and rarely, but there is a place for them. While the editor was speaking more specifically about unnamed blog posters I would like to take a minute to talk about the occassional need for an anonymous source in a story.
Exhibit 1 will always be Watergate. Without "Deep Throat" the scandal surrounding Richard Nixon would never have happened. There are many other examples. Early in my career I was able to do investigative pieces on local judges only with the help of police officers and attorneys speaking on the condition of anonymity. (Which reminds me I'll have to tell the story of "Let 'em go Louie!")
Heck even the Journal's first lieutenant, who is now the enforcer of the no anonymous comments rule, used anonymous sources and "political insiders" during the time he covered politics many years ago.
In recent years, the Journal has turned down or stopped before completion a number of important stories simply because the folks who provided the information had too much to lose if their identity was known. A careful vetting of anonymous sources is crucial, but not impossible.
Reporters are often too quick to accept information based on the vow of anonymity, but there are times that it makes sense to use them. Police officers and nurses commenting about what is going on inside their own institutions face harrassment and discipline if their names were to come to light. It is true of many professions, including journalism.
About a dozen years ago at the Flint Journal we learned that there was no protection for us under the Whistle Blowers Act after a good reporter was fired and asserted protection under the WBA. The Journal's lawyers, who avoided arguing the merits of the case, asserted that Journal reporters were "at will" employees under State law.
A court ruled that reporters at the Journal were "at will" employees and could be fired for any, or no reason, without recourse. It was a chilling ruling that many of the veteran reporters took to heart.
People are free to post here with or without their name. I simply ask that people try to be civil and non-personal in their comments. As always, I reserve the right to edit the more pointedly personal comments. (I've only had to do that once).
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Here in Newburyport(MA), I monitor comments posted to both our daily newspaper and the FJ. Plus I get plenty of anonymous comments on my blog. Recently I commented on another local blog that if people are engaging in a back & forth, they would have more credibility if they used their real names. I was soundly rebuked.
As for anonymous sources, at my most recent gig as a reporter, the editor did not like them. I got tip after tip and more information than one could imagine, but mostly from anonymous sources. I agree with you, many important stories get left by the wayside.
Having said that, I have to note that I sometimes post on the Journal as 'fmrflintoid' rather than under my real name! And I live way over here ... maybe it's instinct.
Good to have you here. Come back often. Our daughter lives in Boston, MA. She finished college and is now working there. She loves the place. I love everything about it but driving there.
Thanks!
It is a whale of a drive ...used to think nothing of it when I was younger, but now ... ouch.
In my traveling days (most of my Adult life) there were three cities I did not rent a car in .. London, England, Chicago & Boston
That was very wise of you, Jim's brother. But why Chicago? They have that nice grid of streets, and people seemed to me to be respectful of other drivers.
Post a Comment