I hear people complaining that they can’t trust certain reporters because they use anonymous sources. 1/
An unfortunate reality of journalism is that we sometimes use anonymous sources — but only when there is absolutely no alternative and the story is too important, or the source would be in serious danger if revealed 2/
You should know that a reporter’s editor ALWAYS knows who the source is. Writers can’t just run wild, making people up. But... 3/
It’s crucial to look at the outlet. At some point, as much as you hate, say, NYT, you have to accept that there are massive editorial checks & balances built into what we do in good journalism, & decide that you believe in that outlet 4/
I’m not saying not to question what you read, but there is a big difference between what’s published in a well-established, critical paper like WaPo & well, other places. Yes, we all make mistakes, but the best journalism orgs tend to not go to the depths of fakery 5/
And before you yell “Jayson Blair” or whoever at me, you know about those fabricators BECAUSE they are the rare instance of such at great outlets. 6/
At some point, we each have choose: Not all media is garbage. This country is great because unlike most of the world we have a free press. That brings all kinds of good & bad actors but it IS possible to distinguish between them, & we have to if we want to keep our democracy. 7/7
P.S. It's plain lazy to just say certain major outlets are crap, full stop, & stop reading them. I (surprise!) even know diligent journos at Fox News — but I'm talking about JOURNALISTS, not pundits, which is a designation that is crucial to distinguish.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
