1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Best way to handle it when a source gives you bad intel

Discussion in 'Journalism topics only' started by Jim Luther Davis, Oct 3, 2014.

  1. PioneerVoice

    PioneerVoice Member

    Sure there are. Issues surrounding victims of sexual assault or minors, for example. These are cases where you don't name them, but in many stories, they are most certainly sources. Other examples exist such as times when someone's life or occupation could be put at immense risk by disclosing the information.

    The common theme here, though, is that it's necessary in the extremes. I'd agree that the use of anonymous sources to spread rumor, opinion, and trite stories is a sad practice.
     
  2. Double Down

    Double Down Well-Known Member

    Why do we assume her original report was incorrect? Because Belichick and Dobson says so?

    Bwahahaha! Excuse me while I step into the hallway to laugh.
     
  3. Songbird

    Songbird Well-Known Member

    She got it right. The story sounds too legit to be wrong.

    And all of a sudden player and coach shake hands and all's forgotten? Uh-huh, sure.
     
  4. Double Down

    Double Down Well-Known Member

    Serious answer is "league source" is often a way to disguise "team source" and give the team source more room to hide. (It could, however, be and agent, and typically is.) Both a team source and league source are in the league, after all. But by giving the team source a bit more room to hide, he/she can deflect blame and say 'Wasn't me, was an agent."

    Obviously anonymous sources are overused. But the idea that you can write, say, investigative pieces without using them ("just put your name on it, you coward!") is ridiculous. If someone has to choose between losing their job/getting blackballed from the profession and keeping the truth to themselves, they're going to chose the latter 99 times out of 100. It's when we start using them for fricken hamstring injuries that it ruins it for real reporting.
     
  5. JimmyHoward33

    JimmyHoward33 Well-Known Member

    Mike Reiss of ESPN Boston essentially said a few days ago essentially what Belichick said today. He's seldom if ever wrong.
     
  6. Doc Holliday

    Doc Holliday Well-Known Member

    Considering Shalise Manza Young has made a public apology for a mistake, I'm going to buy some Reiss stock and say we should believe what Belichick said.

    I would never apologize publicly for something I had written that was correct and I doubt Shalise Manza Young would either.

    Haven't you ever heard a reporter say "I stand by my story" ... well I have spoken those very words myself. In this case Shalise is not. That's enough for me to know what happened.
     
  7. Elliotte Friedman

    Elliotte Friedman Moderator Staff Member

    If you're wrong, you just have to own it. She did the right thing.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page