Archive for March 23rd, 2017
Unnamed sources? Journalists should teach readers why they were used
On Thursday, four journalists for CNN reported:
The FBI has information that indicates associates of President Donald Trump communicated with suspected Russian operatives to possibly coordinate the release of information damaging to Hillary Clinton’s campaign, US officials told CNN.
Information. Indicates. Associates. Communicated. Suspected. Operatives. Possibly. Coordinate. Information. US officials.
Huh? Could this lede be any more vague? This lede is all may have — which leaves open the possibility of may not have.
The story, reported by Pamela Brown, Evan Perez, Jim Sciutto, and Shimon Prokupecz, contains unnamed sources in 10 of the story’s 18 paragraphs. The FBI director is named, but only in reference to stories reported earlier. White House spokesman Sean Spicer and Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov are named, but only in chiding the findings of the story. Two paragraphs near the end of the story contain no sources and appear to be the conclusions of the reporters.