Last week The Times announced a new policy on naming sources -- in short that anonymous sources were presumed persona non grata (see excerpts below). The ink was not yet dry on the policy -- the ASCII was still on the screen -- when the self-immolating Elisabeth Bumiller couldn't find a single named Republican operative to say that President Bush is rarin' to campaign.White House Letter: Bush Ready and Bursting to Bring It On. The lack of an on-the-record source doesn't deter Bumiller, though: she announces that Bush is in charge of his own campaign, making all the tough decisions.
In the sanitized public parlance of journalism, articles that glowingly report that the man in charge is, in fact, in charge, are called "puff pieces." Among journalists they are more often called "blow jobs," indicating a different level of fealty.
Two things are extraordinary here: (1) how quickly the anonymous sources policy was swept aside -- ignored in letter and spirit -- and (2) Bumiller's seeming inability to find a single Republican "operative" to go on the record in a "blow job" for the President.
A couple of grafs back I said that Bumiller was "self-immolating." She got her 30 seconds of infamy just two weeks ago when on the televised NYT/CBS debate/interview of Democratic candidates she asked John Kerry "is God on our side." The clip of Bumiller's question was widely replayed (especially on Comedy Central's The Daily Show) because it highlights so perfectly what is wrong with the inanities of "gotcha" journalism.
Now, about that new Times policy, announced on Feb. 25, on anonymous sources,: here's the text of the policy.
Some excerpts:
The use of unidentified sources is reserved for situations in which the newspaper could not otherwise print information it considers reliable and newsworthy. When we use such sources, we accept an obligation not only to convince a reader of their reliability but also to convey what we can learn of their motivation — as much as we can supply to let a reader know whether the sources have a clear point of view on the issue under discussion....
Whenever anonymity is granted, it should be the subject of energetic negotiation to arrive at phrasing that will tell the reader as much as possible about the placement and motivation of the source — in particular, whether the source has firsthand knowledge of the facts....
We will not use anonymous sourcing when sources we can name are readily available.
Now read Bumiller's piece and see if it fits the policy. And ask why it doesn't.
Recent Comments