Anonymous sources
Ethics and law
SPJ Code of Ethics
“Always question sources’ motives
before promising anonymity. Clarify
conditions attached to any promise
made in exchange for information.
Keep promises.”
Three flavors of anonymity
• Background
– Also called not for attribution
Three flavors of anonymity
• Background
• Deep background
– Better for reporting than for publication
Three flavors of anonymity
• Background
• Deep background
• Off the record
Three flavors of anonymity
•
•
•
•
Background
Deep background
Off the record
Always negotiate
Three don’ts
• Don’t use anonymous sources to
attack someone’s reputation
Three don’ts
• Don’t use anonymous sources to
attack someone’s reputation
• Don’t use anonymous sources if you
could get the same information on
the record
Three don’ts
• Don’t use anonymous sources to
attack someone’s reputation
• Don’t use anonymous sources if you
could get the same information on
the record
• Don’t use anonymous sources
unless you are prepared to go to jail
Questions
• Are readers right to distrust
journalism that relies on anonymous
sources?
Questions
• Are readers right to distrust
journalism that relies on anonymous
sources?
• Should news organizations reduce or
eliminate use of anonymous
sources?
Questions
• Are readers right to distrust
journalism that relies on anonymous
sources?
• Should news organizations reduce or
eliminate use of anonymous
sources?
• Is freedom of the press threatened by
developments such as the BALCO
case?
Legal considerations
• Branzburg v. Hayes (1972) found no
right to protect sources
Legal considerations
• Branzburg v. Hayes (1972) found no
right to protect sources
• First Amendment protects all of us,
not just journalists
Legal considerations
• Branzburg v. Hayes (1972) found no
right to protect sources
• First Amendment protects all of us,
not just journalists
• Three-part balancing test:
– Relevant
Legal considerations
• Branzburg v. Hayes (1972) found no
right to protect sources
• First Amendment protects all of us,
not just journalists
• Three-part balancing test:
– Relevant
– No alternative
Legal considerations
• Branzburg v. Hayes (1972) found no
right to protect sources
• First Amendment protects all of us,
not just journalists
• Three-part balancing test:
– Relevant
– No alternative
– Public interest
The tide has shifted
• Branzburg decision came during the
heroic age of journalism
The tide has shifted
• Branzburg decision came during the
heroic age of journalism
• Public came to distrust the media,
and that attitude affected the courts
The tide has shifted
• Branzburg decision came during the
heroic age of journalism
• Public came to distrust the media,
and that attitude affected the courts
• An absolute shield for journalists
would probably be unconstitutional
Privacy
A few considerations
Four types of privacy law
• Intrusion
– Highly offensive to a reasonable person
Four types of privacy law
• Intrusion
• Publicizing private facts
– Highly offensive to a reasonable person
– No legitimate public interest
Four types of privacy law
• Intrusion
• Publicizing private facts
• False light
– “Libel Jr.”
– Not necessarily untrue
– “Actual malice” applies
Four types of privacy law
•
•
•
•
Intrusion
Publicizing private facts
False light
Commercial appropriation
Overriding themes
• First Amendment protects all of us,
not just professional journalists
Overriding themes
• First Amendment protects all of us,
not just professional journalists
• Protections are greatest for
publishing or broadcasting
Overriding themes
• First Amendment protects all of us,
not just professional journalists
• Protections are strongest for
publishing or broadcasting
• Protections are weakest for news
gathering
– Open-meeting and public-record laws
– Obligation to testify
– Prohibition on intrusion