This article critically examines the practice of unnamed sourcing in journalism. A literature review highlights arguments in favor of and against their use. The authors examine some common examples of anonymous sourcing using the lens of utilitarianism, the ethical model commonly used to justify the practice. We find that few uses of unnamed sourcing can be justified when weighed against diminished credibility and threats to fair, transparent reporting. The authors suggest specific guidelines for journalists that, if followed, would curb many of the pedestrian uses of unnamed sourcing but still allow for the practice in specific circumstances.Critics and scholars have long pointed to the overuse of unnamed sourcing as a vexing problem in journalism. Over the last decade, these complaints have reached a fever pitch. The ombudsmen for both the New York Times and Washington Post recently chastised their own papers for abusing the practice
This content analysis of The Washington Post and The New York Times finds that the use of anonymous sources peaked in the 1960s and 1970s. The analysis also finds that contemporary journalists are more likely to explain the reason for anonymity.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.