Anonymous Sources

Accuracy In Media ^ | June 25, 2003 | Notra Trulock

[walford]

...No current news story is more susceptible to the abuse of anonymous sources than the growing controversy over the accuracy of U.S. intelligence before the war in Iraq. Journalists, especially in the liberal media, are hyperventilating about the failure of the coalition thus far to unearth Saddam Hussein’s stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons. Many are pointing to this failure as evidence that the Bush administration "cooked" intelligence on Iraqi weapons of mass destruction programs to justify attacking Iraq...

...These are very serious allegations, but also very difficult to evaluate. It is well-known that there have been elements inside the intelligence community skeptical about the magnitude of Iraq’s WMD programs or purported Iraqi ties to al Qaeda. And the Post and the New York Times have repeatedly afforded these nay-sayers a forum to air their criticisms. ..

[walford]

The media here, but especially in Europe have been harping on the fact that no significant WMD have been found in Iraq. Very little consideration is being afforded to the possibility that:

A. The world is STILL a better place without Saddam, esp in Iraq.

B. WMD [and top Ba'athist officials] may have been provided safe harbor by the likes of Syria and France. Such distinct possibilities have not been so vigorously 'investigated' by the press.

[Steve_Seattle]

The point of this story is the media's reliance on unattributed sources to create stories potentially embarrassing to the administration. Given the recent Jayson Blair fiasco, this is a very important issue. We must treat any story based on anonymous sources with extreme skepticism. Anyone who has ever worked on even a mid-sized project in government or the private sector knows that there are always naysayers, prophets of doom, and dissenting opinions, no matter how succesful the project eventually turns out to be. But when the media quotes these anonymous sources, people might get the impression that something unusual or sinister was going on, whereas this is just how things typically are in a large organization.

[trebb]

Whenever I see "anonymous sources" I discount the info as being: Made Up, Altered, or the product of someone doing something illegal to either get or divulge the info. Without a confirmable source, there is no validity and it becomes an opinion at best.