Over the span of barely more than a week, readers and viewers of news were reminded of the good and the bad sides of using anonymous sources.
Deep Throat, now self-revealed as former FBI official W. Mark Felt, reminded us of the importance of unnamed sources. Newsweek’s shaky Koran-in-the-toilet story gave evidence of the pitfalls.
Felt’s out-of-the-blue admission that he was Deep Throat, the anonymous source in the Washington Post stories that broke open the Watergate scandal, abruptly ended one of Washington’s oldest and deepest mysteries.
Some, including former Nixon speechwriter Pat Buchanan, reacted with disdain. Felt simply was trying to get even with President Nixon because he had been passed over for FBI director, Buchanan said. Instead of going through proper legal channels, such as a grand jury, he went to the press.
But most regard what Felt did as one of the most significant personal decisions in American history. It launched an investigation and eventually led to President Nixon’s resignation in August 1974. It provided motivation for a series of reforms intended to prevent political abuses.
It also changed American journalism. The press became more assertive, aggressive and committed to rooting out problems. Thousands of young crusaders changed their college majors to journalism.
And it changed American politics. A public already skeptical of the rationale for fighting in Vietnam lost even more trust in government.
Felt wouldn’t have told his story without promises from reporters Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein, and their editors, that they never would identify him as long as he lived. And he has lived a long time. At 91, he may have wanted to see the shocked reaction to his disclosure before it was too late.
Deep Throat is the plus side of using anonymous sources – fleshing out and pinning down one of the 20th century’s most important stories.
The downside was what happened to Newsweek magazine.
Newsweek, after a short defensive delay, “unequivocally retracted” its brief account of Guantanamo guards abusing the holy book of Islam. In the May 30 edition, Richard M. Smith, Newsweek chairman and editor in chief, printed “A Letter to Our Readers” explaining how the magazine had changed its policy on using secret sources.
“Historically, unnamed sources have helped to break or advance stories of great national importance,” he wrote – just days before Deep Throat found his voice – “but overuse can lead to distrust among readers and carelessness among journalists.”
That’s true. Surveys show a majority of readers and viewers don’t trust sources who have no names. Secrecy raises doubts about the motives of reporters and the shadowy sources they rely on.
The Society of Professional Journalists, an organization I’ve been active in for years, has a widely used code of ethics that discourages anonymous sources.
“Identify sources whenever possible,” the code says. “The public is entitled to as much information as possible on sources’ reliability.”
“Always question sources’ motives before promising anonymity,” it adds. “Clarify conditions attached to any promise made in exchange for information. Keep promises.”
In other words, don’t out Deep Throat – unless he outs himself.
Newsweek’s Smith said this: “As always, the burden of proof should lie with the reporters and their editors to show why a promise of anonymity serves the reader.”
He said Newsweek editors, when they decide anonymity is justified, will provide more information about the nature of those sources.
This may be the future of anonymous sources: fewer of them, and better defined. Journalists’ “prime directive,” as they used to say on Star Trek, is to give a full and accurate account of the facts they have learned, including who provided those facts.
Anything less is open to question. Any time anonymous sources are used, someone’s reputation is going to suffer, whether it’s the subject, source or reporter of the story.
Fred Brown, retired Capitol Bureau chief for The Denver Post, is also a former national president of the Society of Professional Journalists.
