Respecting Sources’ Confidentiality: Critical but Not Absolute

Abstract

Confidential sourcing has proven to be an effective tool for investigative journalism, particularly when highly secretive or high public-impact information is at stake and there are too few transparent sources to adequately inform a news story. Nonetheless, many journalists choose to use confidential sources sparingly or not at all because the potential harms in using confidential sources outweigh, in their view, their potential benefits. This chapter explores three key facets of confidential sourcing in an effort to provide a practical model of ethical deliberation for the use of confidential sources. First, it argues that there are justifications for the use of confidential sources in journalism. Second, it discusses what conditions are necessary for the use of confidential sources, what procedures should be in place to use them best, and why, in these cases, confidential sourcing is at least morally permissible, if not morally obligatory. Finally, contrary to the journalistic convention that once a confidential agreement is made, it cannot be broken, the chapter argues for why journalists are at least permitted — even, at times, obligated — to break confidential agreements.

Research Ethics in Investigative Journalism

“…Investigative journalism has been defined in multiple ways. But there is a broad consensus among journalists and scholars that it involves reporting matters of significant public interest that would have remained concealed or kept secret were it not for the self-initiated and independent journalistic scrutiny of people or institutions in positions of power (Protess et al 1991;Weinberg 1995;Hunter 2009). The definition has widened over the years to include "analyzing and revealing the breakdown of social or justice systems and documenting the consequences" (Houston 2009: v).…”

“…The revelations of ex-Central Intelligence Agency employee Edward Snowden of government mass surveillance in the digital era has raised concerns over its chilling effect on journalism and the ability of investigative journalists to establish and maintain sources, more so for those who ask to stay anonymous or be protected (Lashmar 2017). Source protection is increasingly under risk as a result of "digital disruption, and by overreach in measures that are introduced in the name of national security or combatting crime" (Posetti 2017).…”

“…Some have changed the way they store and share sensitive documents. And a number have taken to educating sources in their own protection (Posetti 2017). Without the measures and assurance of protection, an investigative reporter's sources of information may run dry.…”

Unnamed Sources: A Utilitarian Exploration of their Justification and Guidelines for Limited Use

“…1 When anonymous source use is addressed in current journalism ethics textbooks, a cursory review of these ethics-based publications reveals they take a more critical approach than Duffy (2010) found in most current journalism practice textbooks. Ethics textbooks often address issues such as the need to independently verify information, question reporter and source motives, and explain rationales to audiences (Bugeja, 2010;Day, 2006;Quinn, 2010;Wilkins, 1997). While journalists are advised to use anonymous sources judiciously, exceptions are typically made for victims of sex crimes and whistleblowers and, in some cases (Quinn, 2010;Wilkins, 1997), government officials.…”

“…Ethics textbooks often address issues such as the need to independently verify information, question reporter and source motives, and explain rationales to audiences (Bugeja, 2010;Day, 2006;Quinn, 2010;Wilkins, 1997). While journalists are advised to use anonymous sources judiciously, exceptions are typically made for victims of sex crimes and whistleblowers and, in some cases (Quinn, 2010;Wilkins, 1997), government officials. Ethics textbooks tend to associate anonymous source use with the issue of confidentiality; however, the emphasis on promise-keeping to sources granted anonymity can tend to overshadow discussions on the consequences of their use.…”