anonymous sources ethics and law. spj code of ethics “always question sources’ motives before...
TRANSCRIPT
Anonymous sources
Ethics and law
SPJ Code of Ethics
“Always question sources’ motives before promising anonymity. Clarify conditions attached to any promise made in exchange for information. Keep promises.”
Three flavors of anonymity
• Background– Also called not for attribution
Three flavors of anonymity
• Background
• Deep background– Better for reporting than for publication
Three flavors of anonymity
• Background
• Deep background
• Off the record
Three flavors of anonymity
• Background
• Deep background
• Off the record
• Always negotiate
Three don’ts
• Don’t use anonymous sources to attack someone’s reputation
Three don’ts
• Don’t use anonymous sources to attack someone’s reputation
• Don’t use anonymous sources if you could get the same information on the record
Three don’ts
• Don’t use anonymous sources to attack someone’s reputation
• Don’t use anonymous sources if you could get the same information on the record
• Don’t use anonymous sources unless you are prepared to go to jail
Questions
• Are readers right to distrust journalism that relies on anonymous sources?
Questions
• Are readers right to distrust journalism that relies on anonymous sources?
• Should news organizations reduce or eliminate use of anonymous sources?
Questions
• Are readers right to distrust journalism that relies on anonymous sources?
• Should news organizations reduce or eliminate use of anonymous sources?
• Is freedom of the press threatened by developments such as the BALCO case?
Legal considerations
• Branzburg v. Hayes (1972) found no right to protect sources
Legal considerations
• Branzburg v. Hayes (1972) found no right to protect sources
• First Amendment protects all of us, not just journalists
Legal considerations
• Branzburg v. Hayes (1972) found no right to protect sources
• First Amendment protects all of us, not just journalists
• Three-part balancing test:– Relevant
Legal considerations
• Branzburg v. Hayes (1972) found no right to protect sources
• First Amendment protects all of us, not just journalists
• Three-part balancing test:– Relevant– No alternative
Legal considerations
• Branzburg v. Hayes (1972) found no right to protect sources
• First Amendment protects all of us, not just journalists
• Three-part balancing test:– Relevant– No alternative– Public interest
The tide has shifted
• Branzburg decision came during the heroic age of journalism
The tide has shifted
• Branzburg decision came during the heroic age of journalism
• Public came to distrust the media, and that attitude affected the courts
The tide has shifted
• Branzburg decision came during the heroic age of journalism
• Public came to distrust the media, and that attitude affected the courts
• An absolute shield for journalists would probably be unconstitutional
Privacy
A few considerations
Four types of privacy law
• Intrusion– Highly offensive to a reasonable person
Four types of privacy law
• Intrusion
• Publicizing private facts– Highly offensive to a reasonable person– No legitimate public interest
Four types of privacy law
• Intrusion
• Publicizing private facts
• False light– “Libel Jr.”– Not necessarily untrue– “Actual malice” applies
Four types of privacy law
• Intrusion
• Publicizing private facts
• False light
• Commercial appropriation
Overriding themes
• First Amendment protects all of us, not just professional journalists
Overriding themes
• First Amendment protects all of us, not just professional journalists
• Protections are greatest for publishing or broadcasting
Overriding themes
• First Amendment protects all of us, not just professional journalists
• Protections are strongest for publishing or broadcasting
• Protections are weakest for news gathering– Open-meeting and public-record laws– Obligation to testify– Prohibition on intrusion