Slacktivist has a good post up about the increasing use of unnamed sources by journalists. Look, there should be a rather simple rule here - administration officials should not be allowed to "anonymously" put out pro-administration spin. In these situations, the sources only wish to maintain their anonymity in order to preserve their credibility. This lets them get away with more shit-spewing than they otherwise would if they were "on the record."
Journalists let them do this to maintain their access, and so we get a situation in which reporters simply become stenographers (are you listening, Sue?) for top administration officials, and to maintain their quality access to such golden quotes as "top officials say that Bush is bold and determined, and also bold." They may as well just re-type the White House press releases.
And, as I keep repeating, if sources lie to journalists then they are no longer under any obligation to protect them. In fact, they are then obligated to inform their readers that they were lied to and by whom.
Even Robert Novak copped to using Robert Hanssen as a source, although he didn´t go into nearly enough detail about that situation.
