Another rant against unnamed sources

Nice Schuykill reference.
Ever try driving on that god-forsaken road?

And I travel west of the Schuykill on a somewhat regular basis. It's going south of the Mason-Dixon line that really scares me.

 

You get a bunny sticker, rb.

 

Papers write lots of stuff that's not true, simply because so-and-so is willing to say it on the record. I'm sure I've quoted lots of people who were lying. When I've used unnamed sources, it been to offer information that otherwise would not be available.
If absolute truth is the absolute standard, there's no way to print a paper because we can't hook all our sources, even those on the record, to polygraphs. You covered two basketball coaches who are fairly well known for their ability to massage the truth; do you really believe they never, ever lied to the media?

 

Found this one this morning. Confused the hell out of me. Not knocking the writer, just sayin'.

 

My best friend's sister's boyfriend's brother's girlfriend heard from this guy who knows this kid who's going with the girl who saw Nick Saban pass out at 31 Flavors last night. I guess it's pretty serious.

 

Never mind knocking the writer...shooting him is a better alternative, and the editor who let it go, as well.

 

Thank you, Simone.

 

Exhibit A of what has become a laundry list full of "questionable" (my word) "truthiness" (thanks, S. Colbert!) being performed in the Heart of Dixie.

rb

 

No, but if they lied and they said it on the record, with their name attached to it, people know where the misinformation came from. They can be held accountable. If you publish wrong information from an anonymous source, the only one accountable is you. Because to the reader, it looks like you just made something up. Yes, sources of all types lie, but in terms of credibility, there is a vast difference between getting someone on the record and citing an anonymous source.

 

I've tried to stay out of this, but alas, I'm weak-willed in the matter. Therefore:

rb spends too much time looking on other writers' laptop screens to determine just how hard they are or are not working in the press box, instead of minding his own house, sources familiar with people close to the press box situation said.

 

Ha!

rb

 

Bottom line, it's still a lie. It's still misinformation. And you're printing it and claiming you have nothing to do with it. Nonsense.
I'd rather have a wealth of sources I trust so that I know what goes on inside, say, a coaching search and share what I can from those sources than sit there on the outside and quote people who don't know what's happening.
"No one has contacted us for permission to talk to coach Jones," said the SID from State U.
Bleech!
Meanwhile, the coach's agent and the university's headhunter are talking up a storm, and your readers know diddly about it.