Anonymous sources are a necessary evil of journalism that are unlikely to ever go away. People giving information value their privacy as well as the security of their name, and thus, it's probable that we won't find some alternative method to anonymously quoting people or citing information.
But under which pretenses is this practice inappropriate? It's certainly accepted to provide anonymous sources when the information is factual and objective; but what about sources that provide more of a stance? Do you provide the perspective of the police officer who witnessed the crime, and allow him to anonymously say his piece? Or does anonymous opinion have no place in the newsroom?
Personally, I believe that if you're going to give your opinion, then give it out in the open. It's your opinion, and such sentiments should go hand in hand with the person who believes in them. Anonymity in opinionated comments is just a wee bit on the shady side, if you ask me.
Fairness & the Accused
4 comments:
In most cases, that's probably true. But in neighborhoods where there is high crime, for instance, you might never get any inside information if that person is forced to publicly identify themselves. There's huge stigma about "narcing." Sometimes there is very real danger for these people.
Also in situations where a person's employment could be compromised if they speak out about confidential business practices or something similar, where there is pending investigation, etc. Sometimes you just won't get the story if you force identification or put your sources in jeopardy. It's about seeking the balance to me! You are saying you think a reporter should *never* use anon sources?
No, not at all. I'm saying a reporter should never quote an anonymous opinion. Anonymous information is perfectly fine - but to express an anonymous opinion? I don't think that has any place in the media.
I agree that an anoymous opinion has very little value. To give credence to a opinion, it's necessary to know where the opinions are comming from. Anoymous sources are sometimes needed to uncover facts and details of a case, but I think it can be prejudicial when anonymity is used for opinions.
Post a Comment