Stop The Anonymous Quotes!

I have been among the many who have complained about the New York Times cavalier attitude about quoting anonymous sources, usually with the flimsiest of excuses: ‘The senior official declined to be named, because he is not cleared to speak publicly on the topic,’ or the like. They shouldn’t be quoted, then. These are political tools, not people frightened by a despotic government.

The pubic editor at the Times concurs:

Clark Hoyt, Squandered Trust

The Times continues to hurt itself with readers by misusing anonymous sources.

I have received complaints about recent articles in which unnamed sources were allowed to 1) accuse a real estate agent of racial discrimination, 2) provide a letter from a dead man in the midst of a political controversy, and 3) discuss the press strategy of a politician who seeks to manipulate reporters with, among other tactics, off-the-record phone calls.

Despite written ground rules to the contrary and promises by top editors to do better, The Times continues to use anonymous sources for information available elsewhere on the record. It allows unnamed people to provide quotes of marginal news value and to remain hidden with little real explanation of their motives, their reliability, or the reasons why they must be anonymous.