On Sat, May 03, 2003 at 06:18:35PM -0500, J.A. Terranson wrote:

Leaving aside the fact that the story and all of the components were patently false, I am interested in the opionions of the few press-persons we have here on the actions of the reporters.

As a press person, are there any conditions under which you would reveal confidential sources? If so, under what conditions would you do so? If not, do you have any observations/comments/yawns you would like to share on the instant case?

It's late and I'm not really that familiar with that case, so I won't comment on it. But for a reporter, a guarantee of confidentiality is (or at least should be) what a generation ago would have been called a sacred trust. If you can't live up to your end of the bargain, don't promise to preserve confidentiality. The only person to whom I will reveal a confidential source is my editor. This is standard and necessary journalistic practice: a news editor has to be able to make an independent judgment about whether the source is reliable or not. In practice, my editors have trusted me enough not to ask for the source's identity (and they also may not want to be burdened with that knowledge). On my website, I guarantee confidentiality re: email tips but with this addendum:

There is an exception to this guarantee of confidentiality. If someone sends me a direct and credible threat to harm someone's person or property, I reserve the right to make that email public.

If you're interested, you may want to check out some of the poynter.org forums on the topic. I imagine they're buzzing right about now. -Declan