My friend Ben Fritz noted an interesting contradiction.
Here's New York Times editor Bill Keller in a public memo on June 23, 2005 (PDF):
Our policy on anonymous sources is a good one, and bears repeating. It begins: "We resist granting anonymity except as a last resort to obtain information that we believe to be newsworthy and reliable." The information should be of compelling interest, and unobtainable by other means. We resist granting anonymity for opinion, speculation or personal attacks.
A quote in an article on "Jackass 2.5" published Thursday by NYT reporter David M. Halbfinger:
“There’s more vomiting, nudity and defecation,” one executive said, speaking more candidly than the companies involved had agreed to and on condition of anonymity. “The stuff that consumers really want.”
If that isn't "newsworthy," "of compelling interest," and "unobtainable by other means," I don't know what is!
Comments