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

Abstract

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

The Evolution of Objective and Interpretative Journalism in the Western Press

“…Follow-up studies may investigate this further because for normative reasons the use of unnamed sources should be limited to only those cases "of compelling public importance," or where it is required "to protect an innocent or wrongful party." 47 Overuse of anonymous sources, on the contrary, may undermine the credibility of the news media and the ethos of the hard-news paradigm.…”

The Ethical Algorithm: Journalist/Whistleblower Relationships Explored Through the Lens of Social Exchange

“…However, these ethical judgments also are weighed with the potential to lose audience trust. When choosing to use unnamed sources in a report, reporters typically apply Mill’s utilitarian principles of justice, weighing the importance of informing the public and the impartial consideration of individuals (Duffy & Freeman, 2011). Notably, Vultee (2010) posited that naming sources is merely what Tuchman (1972) called a “strategic ritual,” a habitual practice engaged in without regard to ramifications.…”

‘We’re more ethical than they are’: Third-person and first-person perceptions of the ethical climate of American journalists

“…Both Kohlberg’s theory and ethical climate theory are based on classical ethical philosophy, including the universal principles of Immanuel Kant (1993), the greatest good for the greatest number of John Stewart Mill’s (1859) utilitarianism, John Rawls’ (1971) concept of justice from a position of ignorance as to who will benefit and who will not, and Aristotle’s (1999) belief in treating people as ends in themselves. While journalists have often been linked with utilitarian thinking (Duffy and Freeman, 2011; Peck, 2006), the profession’s paramount duty of truth telling echoes Kant. Also akin to Kohlberg’s theory, the goal of ethical climate theory is to explain and predict ethical behavior that yields the greatest good for an organization and society at large (Simha and Cullen, 2012).…”