May 23 2005
Newsweek Will No Longer Use Anonymous Sources…
We will raise the standards for the use of anonymous sources throughout the magazine. Historically, unnamed sources have helped to break or advance stories of great national importance, but overuse can lead to distrust among readers and carelessness among journalists. As always, the burden of proof should lie with the reporters and their editors to show why a promise of anonymity serves the reader. From now on, only the editor or the managing editor, or other top editors they specifically appoint, will have the authority to sign off on the use of an anonymous source.
In the week since our Periscope item about alleged abuse of the Qur’an at Guantanamo Bay became a heated topic of national conversation, it will come as no surprise to you that we have been engaged in a great deal of soul-searching and reflection. Since cutting short a trip to Asia on the weekend we published our account of how we reported the story, I have had long talks with our Editor Mark Whitaker, Managing Editor Jon Meacham and other key staff members, and I wanted to share my thoughts with you and to affirm—and reaffirm—some important principles that will guide our news gathering in the future.
Well, that takes care of liberal magazines. Now what about liberal bloggers? I mean, Newsweek has written the following in this letter (prior to what I’ve cited above:
As most of you know, we have unequivocally retracted our story. In the light of the Pentagon’s denials and our source’s changing position on the allegation, the only responsible course was to say that we no longer stand by our story.
We have also offered a sincere apology to our readers and especially to anyone affected by violence that may have been related to what we published. To the extent that our story played a role in contributing to such violence, we are deeply sorry.
Let me assure both our readers and our staffers that NEWSWEEK remains every bit as committed to honest, independent and accurate reporting as we always have been. In this case, however, we got an important story wrong, and honor requires us to admit our mistake and redouble our efforts to make sure that nothing like this ever happens again.
Shame they didn’t write snarky “mock-memos” with accusations based on those stories. Then they could’ve pretended to be liberal bloggers and just ignored the fact afterwards. See, when you’re a liberal blogger with no integrity, you can write what you want based on whatever source you want, and as long as the source isn’t yours, you never have to retract it. Better off dumb, than to admit being wrong, I guess.
I have an anonymous source that agrees with me.
Source: Newsweek via MSNBC.com
