Anonymous Sources

[alfred russel]

AR, do you think the AP guide is good or bad?

I think the AP guide is good. My view is that a lot of uses of anonymous sources fall short of that standard.

[alfred russel]

So what exactly the hill you want to die on?  That sources should only be protected when the story falls into a category you deem acceptable?

That gratuitous use of anonymous sources is shit journalism, the CNN story as the non theoretical example.

[The Brain]

AR, do you think the AP guide is good or bad?

I think the AP guide is good. My view is that a lot of uses of anonymous sources fall short of that standard.

As you know many news outlets are about telling a story, influencing society in a desired direction. Not about reporting news. If you're an orange fan you might want apples to taste like oranges, but it's an uphill battle.

[The Minsky Moment]

I will die on this hill

Please don't, choose life.

[crazy canuck]

I will die on this hill

Please don't, choose life.

There is a compelling pro choice argument here

[DGuller]

I will die on this hill

Please don't, choose life.

There is a compelling pro choice argument here

CC, serious question, in a thread full of serious questions.  On a scale of 1 to 10, with 1 being Martinus and 10 being The Brain, where do you think most of your contributions to discourse on this forum land?

[crazy canuck]

I will die on this hill

Please don't, choose life.

There is a compelling pro choice argument here

CC, serious question, in a thread full of serious questions.  On a scale of 1 to 10, with 1 being Martinus and 10 being The Brain, where do you think most of your contributions to discourse on this forum land?

20

[Monoriu]

I don't have a problem with anonymous sources.  If the media doesn't use anonymous sources, the implication is that I will know a lot less, because the fact is a lot of people will only speak on condition of being anonymous.  The alternative is they won't speak at all. 

[grumbler]

I agree with the AP that the bar for using anonymous sources should be high.  I have seen no evidence that the CNN story did not meet that bar.

[The Minsky Moment]

with 1 being Martinus

A bit harsh on Marty he had some truly visionary ideas. If only the Capitol Police had done more tackling last weeks riot could have stopped in its tracks.

[The Minsky Moment]

One of the notable characteristics of the Trump era was the brutal vindictiveness meted out on any person who publicly called out the President's actions. People like Vindman and Hill were trashed, had careers destroyed and were exposed to harassment, threats and intimidation.  At the same time, the Trump administration displayed an unprecedented lack of transparency, ignoring subpoenas and dismantling and undermining the IGs at every turn.  To complain about anonymous sources as if in a vacuum when we live now in this very real context is breathtakingly naive.  One of the key roles of an independent media is to hold power accountable and expose abuses.  Anonymous sources are critical and essential tools in that task.  There are questions of reliability which is why good journalists disclose their use and (hopefully) vet them.  The risk of unreliability has to be balanced against the benefit of throwing some sunshine and light over the darkest and most dangerous corridors of power.

[alfred russel]

One of the notable characteristics of the Trump era was the brutal vindictiveness meted out on any person who publicly called out the President's actions. People like Vindman and Hill were trashed, had careers destroyed and were exposed to harassment, threats and intimidation.  At the same time, the Trump administration displayed an unprecedented lack of transparency, ignoring subpoenas and dismantling and undermining the IGs at every turn.  To complain about anonymous sources as if in a vacuum when we live now in this very real context is breathtakingly naive.  One of the key roles of an independent media is to hold power accountable and expose abuses.  Anonymous sources are critical and essential tools in that task.  There are questions of reliability which is why good journalists disclose their use and (hopefully) vet them.  The risk of unreliability has to be balanced against the benefit of throwing some sunshine and light over the darkest and most dangerous corridors of power.

I disagree on two fronts:

-the lesser of the two is that this specific case relates to Congress and not the Executive branch, and the executive is quite notably exiting the scene.
-it is mind numbingly obvious how corrupt and incompetent Trump is. You have senior people that served in the highest levels of his administration, who have come out on the record, under their own names, and detailed just those facts.

[The Minsky Moment]

Well the specific case is members of Congress who allegedly don't want to identify themselves as crypto anti Trumpites for fear of murder or assault.  So to expect them to volunteer their names seems unrealistic.

[mongers]

What is Languish, but a large collection of anonymous sources?

[Maladict]

What is Languish, but a large collection of anonymous sources?

Says who?