When a Story Goes Terribly Wrong

Time Magazine online ^ | 5-22-05 | Richard Lacayo

[MamaLucci]

< snip >

Despite the potential problems with anonymous sources, news organizations aren't likely to stop using them anytime soon. There are too many people with essential information who are afraid to go public, sometimes out of fear of losing their jobs. (At present, TIME is defending in the courts the refusal of its correspondent Matthew Cooper to disclose one of his sources to a federal grand jury.) But many in the media, amid periodic waves of criticism, are re-examining how often to use unnamed sources.

[MamaLucci]

AFAIC, the title does not reflect the tenor of the article........but, consider the source.

[lt.america]

One thing I would like other journalistic sources to point out is how Newsweek knew about the Monica L. story, but didn't run it because it wanted to be 100% sure. We all know the rest of the story, Drudge scooped Newsweek, Feinstein lost his shot at stardom...etc., etc.

Bottom line, they proceeded with caution when the Democrats were in power but because they don't like the current administration and loath our military they decided to press forward on some half baked tip from a sketchy source.

[MamaLucci]

Bottom line, they proceeded with caution when the Democrats were in power but because they don't like the current administration and loath our military they decided to press forward on some half baked tip from a sketchy source.

Bingo.

[xJones]

They still don't get it, but they probably never will.

I'd love to have been a fly on the wall when Newsweek's "knowledgeable government employee source" backed out of his 'tip' and left them high and dry. Isakoff and crew probably invented new cuss words for the occasion.:)

[lt.america]

On a sidenote. When I was right out of college I got a subscription to Newsweek because I thought it was my duty as a citizen to be informed on current issues. I was more of a moderate(slightly to the left of Attila the Hun) at that time, but after two issues I promptly canceled my subscription because it was so ridiculously slanted. I usually don't admit I ever had one to my friends.

[Alia]

bookmark

[swilhelm73]

The MSM has so abused the use of anonymous sources that if they cared a whit about their integrity, which they don't, they would ban the use of such for the forseeable future.

We've caught the leading lights of the MSM lying so often via anonymous sources, that one is safest presuming it is the reporter making up such statements on his own.

If the American people need to hear what janitor #23 has to say at the Pentagon, they also need to know who it is coming from, not have it invariably attributed to a "Senior White House official".

[MamaLucci]

Excellent response.....I don't have the attention, or time,
to spend on this thread today, but wanted to say "right on!"
to your post. Have a great rest of your Sunday.

[hosepipe]

[ The MSM has so abused the use of anonymous sources that if they cared a whit about their integrity, which they don't, they would ban the use of such for the forseeable future. ]

The Moral: We're using anonymous sources (i.e. LIES) and theres nothing YOU can do about it.. NYAH!.. The Constitution gives US a RIGHT TO LIE..