- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Anonymous sources........should or shouldn't be allowed in reporting the news?
Posted on 9/6/20 at 10:11 am
Posted on 9/6/20 at 10:11 am
I know many will defend the "anonymous source" reporting as being integral to a free and open press and I could partially agree with that argument. My problem with anonymous sources is when this method of reporting the news is used for personal attacks against people. If some reporter wants to make a comment or they write a piece that uses anonymous sources to claim an unnamed astrophysicist believes earth will suffer catastrophic collision with meteor in 6 months, I have know problem with that, probably irresponsible but no individual is being slandered.
But what we're seeing with Trump is "anonymous sources" frequently being used to slander the president with no repercussions for the people making the accusations. Essentially the Gaslight Media can strategically time these slanderous anonymous source attacks against the POTUS through the election. It doesn't seem ethical, but then again why would I expect the Gaslight Media to be ethical.
But what we're seeing with Trump is "anonymous sources" frequently being used to slander the president with no repercussions for the people making the accusations. Essentially the Gaslight Media can strategically time these slanderous anonymous source attacks against the POTUS through the election. It doesn't seem ethical, but then again why would I expect the Gaslight Media to be ethical.
Posted on 9/6/20 at 10:14 am to Bass Tiger
An anonymous source is not "open press." It's opinion, often libel, that's presented as fact without any material basis.
Articles that have anonymous sourcing should be required to have a warning after the title.
Articles that have anonymous sourcing should be required to have a warning after the title.
Posted on 9/6/20 at 10:15 am to Bass Tiger
If you don't have a name, you don't really have a credible source IMO
in today's media, I could call CNN and pretend to be whistle blower on "Trump uses a foot wedge at his country club, brags about not paying taxes, and steals candy from black babies" and it might make the evening news
in today's media, I could call CNN and pretend to be whistle blower on "Trump uses a foot wedge at his country club, brags about not paying taxes, and steals candy from black babies" and it might make the evening news
Posted on 9/6/20 at 10:20 am to Bass Tiger
They should be allowed. But they should be corroborated. And they should be written with skepticism.
Some of the most important journalism has been predicated upon anonymous sources. Unfortunately journalism has died and morphed into narrative crafting for most major outlets.
Some of the most important journalism has been predicated upon anonymous sources. Unfortunately journalism has died and morphed into narrative crafting for most major outlets.
Posted on 9/6/20 at 10:20 am to Bass Tiger
I believe in the past we as a society could somewhat believe the MSM had done their due diligence and verified the provided information. However current MSM are dirty rotten no good bastards that would slander their Moms if they thought it would be a great headline.
Posted on 9/6/20 at 10:23 am to Bass Tiger
Using anonymous sources leverages they credibility of the journalist or news organization, so the Atlantic might as well be pissing in the wind as it has none.
Posted on 9/6/20 at 10:24 am to Bass Tiger
At this point, I don't think it really matters. Honest,impartial journalism is dead...if it ever lived.
In this latest example, I think it actually helps Trump that the sources are anonymous.
Let's not pretend that the journalists aren't capable of coordinating with the enemies of truth to find "on the record " named sources who will outright lie to achieve their goals.
One only has to remove Christine Blasey Ford vs. Justice Kavanagh.
I actually don't doubt that Jennifer Griffin has sources who support her reporting. I also don't think that her motivation is necessarily TDS on her part, but rather her reporting has mostly centered around military matters, and as such, those are her sources. She is just being used. I think she was chosen specifically, because she's at Fox. They think that if she reports it, credibility is added to the Atlantic story.
In this latest example, I think it actually helps Trump that the sources are anonymous.
Let's not pretend that the journalists aren't capable of coordinating with the enemies of truth to find "on the record " named sources who will outright lie to achieve their goals.
One only has to remove Christine Blasey Ford vs. Justice Kavanagh.
I actually don't doubt that Jennifer Griffin has sources who support her reporting. I also don't think that her motivation is necessarily TDS on her part, but rather her reporting has mostly centered around military matters, and as such, those are her sources. She is just being used. I think she was chosen specifically, because she's at Fox. They think that if she reports it, credibility is added to the Atlantic story.
Posted on 9/6/20 at 10:29 am to Bass Tiger
Short of a violation of slander/defamation laws, not much can be done about it given our rightful deference to 1st Amendment protections. But at this stage I personally don't feel it's at all unreasonable to basically tether MSM to the Democratic Party and judge them as a whole unit. Judge the media wing just the same as the political affairs wing, i.e. believable/credible or not, and in fact the media can and will be a detriment to the Democratic Party at the end of the day. But that's the way they want it, so they got it. Getting it.
Posted on 9/6/20 at 10:30 am to Bass Tiger
I find it odd to have "anonymous sources” in this day and age when it comes to Trump....doesn’t every lib dream of being the one to take down OMB? Why would they want to stay anonymous when they could be the hero?
Posted on 9/6/20 at 10:32 am to Bass Tiger
Without anomymous sources, the suffix “-gate” would have no meaning today.
Posted on 9/6/20 at 10:33 am to Bass Tiger
Anonymous sources are only acceptable if they can make trump look bad. Doesn't matter if they are true or not.
Wikileaks published actual content from Democrats themselves, that proved the Democrat party is corrupt. That content was considered unusable because not every person involved in collecting that content was made public.
As for the anonymous sources the msm always use.. I honestly believe that there are no anonymous sources. I believe it's just the msm making up lies and then using a make believe "anonymous source" as shielding, to protect them from lawsuits.
Wikileaks published actual content from Democrats themselves, that proved the Democrat party is corrupt. That content was considered unusable because not every person involved in collecting that content was made public.
As for the anonymous sources the msm always use.. I honestly believe that there are no anonymous sources. I believe it's just the msm making up lies and then using a make believe "anonymous source" as shielding, to protect them from lawsuits.
Posted on 9/6/20 at 10:35 am to honeybadger07
quote:
Why would they want to stay anonymous when they could be the hero?
Exactly. If you are absolutely sure of what you allege then why not show that confidence by owning up to it?
Posted on 9/6/20 at 10:35 am to Bass Tiger
Anyone can make something up when attributing something to an anonymous source. Look up Stephen Glass, a 1990s writer for The New Republic and other publications who did just that.
Posted on 9/6/20 at 10:45 am to Bass Tiger
quote:
should or shouldn't be allowed
Should or shouldn't be allowed by whom, exactly?
Posted on 9/6/20 at 10:49 am to Bass Tiger
Allowed by who?
The media is private business.
However, this practice should be condemned and ridiculed.
The media is private business.
However, this practice should be condemned and ridiculed.
Posted on 9/6/20 at 10:51 am to Bjorn Cyborg
It should simply be held against the Democratic Party. And it will.
Posted on 9/6/20 at 10:57 am to Bass Tiger
Should not.
They are basically fan fiction for Democrats.
They are basically fan fiction for Democrats.
Posted on 9/6/20 at 11:37 am to Bass Tiger
Anonymous sources have been used forever. Get over it.
Posted on 9/6/20 at 11:45 am to Indefatigable
quote:
quote:
should or shouldn't be allowed
Should or shouldn't be allowed by whom, exactly?
I haven’t decided yet. There’s something really fricked up when the Resistance Media can orchestrate a coordinated attack with the Dim Marxists Party to attack their common enemies, in this instance, Trump.
I’m really close to leaning towards some ethical standards or law that requires verifiable sources when the reporting is targeted at an individual. We’re seeing nothing more the slander reporting by the MSM when Trump’s the main focus of the reporting. The MSM has morphed into a Dim propaganda apparatus who’s primary mission is to destroy the President.
The MSM are nothing more than political arsonists who disseminate false information knowing the target of their attacks have no recourse but to deny or ignore the BS....either way the victim is left to put out the fire as the MSM moves on to light the next political fire. The real issue is there’s little a person can do about it unless you’re fortunate like Nick Sandman and you have proof to refute the MSM’s lies.
Posted on 9/6/20 at 11:52 am to Bass Tiger
quote:
I actually don't doubt that Jennifer Griffin has sources who support her reporting
And if she doesn't vet them periodically, she falls into the trap of becoming as worthless as her "sources" should they lie.
MY bet is that she never went behind the curtain and looked for an unknown source that could verify what her sources told her. Meanwhile, people in the room, including one that got fired and doesn't like Trump ...are making her look like an idiot.
No one wins in this one and it doesn't sway a voting public when the other side did everything they could to put Soldier's lives at risk while pretending to be on the side of the military.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News