Too many people have a blatant misunderstanding of the use of anonymous quotes. At The Minaret we weigh the decision to use quotes anonymously or not heavily and at length.
Sources that request anonymity should be granted it when putting their names to a quote can put them in danger, either physical, with their jobs, or legally. If a whistleblower would lose his or her job, their information should be anonymous. If a drug dealer wants to talk about their business for an exposition about the drug trade, it may be appropriate to keep their name anonymous.
However, anonymity is a very dangerous subject for newspapers. An unattributed quote immediately allows the reader to question the authenticity of the quote. Without a name on it, a quote could have come from anywhere. Anonymous quotes routinely get newspapers in trouble.
Too many people request anonymity when they don’t need it. And too many journalists grant it. I have had people approach me with a story about an intramural team running up the score on their opponents, and requesting that I keep their names out of the story.
At the base of this misunderstanding of anonymous quotes is a lack of media literacy. Newspapers have an obligation to the truth, and the truth is more believable when there is a name attached to it. There is nothing to fear by putting your name to 99 percent of quotes.
Last week, we dealt with a number of potentially anonymous quotes. In one, a student was arrested for a misdemeanor. It is my policy at The Minaret that misdemeanor offenders should not have their names put in the article in most cases. However, she was interviewed and had many interesting and provoking statements about the arrest of her and her friend. She made the brave decision to put her name to the quotes and not request anonymity, and the story that was published was balanced and compelling
In our most-read article, a source was used without attribution. This person only wished to be identified as a “mutual friend” of two people in an article. The quote was contrary to public opinion of one subject of the story. However, the quote struck a common chord that was found in dozens of comments regarding the same person. The quote was left anonymous as to not bring unnecessary criticism upon the speaker. For this quote, The Minaret and I have taken huge criticism. People have accused us of making it up. We have been blasted for running a quote that people did not agree with or thought did not include the truth.
This is the consequence that comes with running an unattributed quote. I can assure that we did not make the quote up. I can assure you that the thought was not a singly-held one. I can also assure you that there are hundreds of people who feel opposite of the quote. And both are valid opinions. I don’t pretend to know the truth, but I did use the anonymous quote to offer two sides of the story.
When questioning an anonymous source, and every reader should question them, one major thing to think about is this: why would an author falsify that quote? Does the writer have something to gain by making it up?
It’s very easy to criticize without thinking. It’s very easy to throw stones. One of the things I have trouble comprehending is why people use anonymous Web site comments to blast an anonymous source. It happens over and over again for us. Why?
