A problem with journalists/editors not reporting things - or, similarly, having off the record conversations that contradict what is public - is that going forward those reporters end up talking around it. That is, they report on subjects pretending they don't know a key piece of information.
The whole information stream becomes corrupted.
It is like all the reporters in the 90s quoting Republicans bashing the evil immoral Clinton while knowing full well half of them had secret side families.
Do readers really understand what is happening? If not then what are they doing?
