Off the record
One of the worst things a reporter can do (besides libel, or basically being Jayson Blair) is betray sources. If a reporter agrees that something is going to be "off the record," it damn well better be, or else such information won't be given the next time. If a reporter burns a source, word quickly spreads and the damage worsens.I'm fairly certain I can say that I have never burned a source, and people tell me things because they know I won't let them down. As time goes by, more people are willing to tell me things.
I love getting more information, and I love it when I can confirm that information and print it. But sometimes I can't print the information. In one case, I knew part of a story but had to wait about five months before I could print it. Other things have been waiting much longer.
What makes it frustrating is seeing the shoddy television 'reporters' use the anonymous sources by beginning and ending all sorts of outlandish newscasts with, "sources tell us," or, "officials close to the investigation said..." One reporter with a local CBS affiliate is especially notorious for doing this.
It bothers me because I know that some of the "off the record" information I receive is not always completely accurate. It's a piece of the incomplete puzzle, and my sources don't usually have the whole puzzle figured out. These TV reporters can call themselves journalists, but if I printed the stuff, I'd be no better than a tabloid found in the check-out line at the grocery store.
(Oh, and this information is all on the record, thank you very much.)
Posted by Layla at 9:50 AM, November 15, 2003
— Comments —