Basing a news story on a single “anonymous source” is inherently risky, and a brief Newsweek item alleging that American interrogators flushed a copy of the Koran down a toilet is a tragic example of the pitfalls of rushing to print before facts have been solidly nailed down.
Newsweek’s story may have touched off rioting in Afghanistan that resulted in at least 16 deaths. Now the magazine has retracted the story with apologies to those who suffered any consequences.
Increasingly, American journalism is wary of “anonymous sources,” preferring on-the-record quotes. Many media outlets, including The Post, say anonymous sources should be used only as a last resort, under guidelines that are getting stricter as a result of some high-profile abuses.
“As a standard, I teach that if you have an anonymous source with very damaging or very important information, it behooves you to find a second source in a different area who can confirm what you got from the first,” said Ania Savage, who teaches journalism at the University of Denver. “Most newspapers have that policy.”
Journalistic giants like The New York Times and Los Angeles Times are moving to diminish the use of unnamed sources as evidence grows of the public’s skepticism. And there have been stirrings among the Washington press corps, which thrives on insider information, to push officials at background sessions to go on the record. We endorse those efforts.
Without question, there are instances in which the public interest is served by bringing facts to light that are only available from sources who fear the consequences if their names are used. But caution is always a wise course.
The Newsweek episode shows why “anonymous sources” can lead to red faces.
Allegations from detainees that Islam’s holy book was defiled have circulated for months, but Newsweek’s chatty Periscope column said it had verification from a “knowledgeable” U.S. official who read it in a military report. But the Pentagon said last week that several investigations have found “no credible evidence of such acts.”
Desecration of the Koran is too incendiary an assertion to be addressed in a brief column item. Editors should have demanded more thorough reporting – a second or a third source at the least, or better yet, a look at the military report.
Newsweek isn’t the first or only publication to run erroneous material, but seldom is the impact so devastating. The magazine did not retract the item at first, but did so on Monday. U.S. policy and PR blunders give the Muslim Street cause enough to hate the United States without an unverified magazine report pouring gasoline on the fire.
