All Blog Posts from Public Eye

If nothing else, the trial of Scooter Libby has provided an unprecedented public display of the symbiotic relationship between reporters and their government sources. So it's little surprise that this display has become one of the most popular storylines in coverage of the trial.

The CIA leak investigation, after all, ignited a firestorm of criticism about anonymous sourcing – a journalistic convention that's a veritable hallmark of political reporting these days.

The first installment of "Frontline's" "News War," which was formulated to spell out the "political and legal forces challenging the mainstream news media today," was devoted almost entirely to the CIA leak investigation and its effect on reporters.

Monday's edition of the trial included a parade of reporters taking the stand. The Los Angeles Times today highlights some of what came out of their testimony.

The reporters were "aware of the stakes" of testifying in a criminal trial about the details of their conversations with confidential sources. Which is why "almost every reporter who has testified has offered a nuanced explanation seemingly aimed more at potential sources than at sitting jurors," as the Times puts it. "Several dwelt on their efforts to get a 'personal waiver' from Libby or other sources, meaning permission to violate the initial terms of the interview."

And for all the hand-wringing over whether anonymous sources are good or a bad part of the game, Washington Post reporter Glenn Kessler suggested he would have a pretty hard time doing his job without them. "Almost every single conversation I have in Washington is on background," he told jurors.

Covering Your World Enough?: It's something many a Public Eye Outside Voicer has complained about: the continued lack of investment in foreign coverage by U.S. news outlets. Now Christian Science Monitor reporter Jill Carroll (who was held hostage in Iraq for more than 80 days last year) has entered the fray by authoring a report for Harvard's Shorenstein Center. In it, she argues that by closing foreign bureaus and limiting foreign correspondents, news outlets are "making a financial miscalculation and missing an opportunity to capitalize on an asset that they appear to undervalue."

In particular, reports Editor & Publisher, Carroll also "points out that the number of foreign bureaus at the three major networks had 'dropped significantly since 9/11.' ABC, NBC and CBS all had six foreign bureaus by the summer of 2003, according to American Journalism Review, after ABC and NBC cut seven and CBS cut four bureaus since the 1980's." While such cutbacks might save money in the short term, Carroll argues that "higher quality employees, greater credibility and exclusive stories are all a result of having one's own staff providing good quality foreign news coverage. These benefits strengthen the medium as an organization and when factored into a cost-benefit calculation, the costs associated with producing good quality foreign news coverage begin to seem like a bargain."

Courtroom Drama For News Addicts: As the Scooter Libby trial drags on, the New York Times notes this morning that the case has already shaken the unofficial rules of engagement among reporters and confidential sources. One law school dean told the paper that the CIA leak investigation "has undercut the assumptions that existed for several decades that a reporter’s promise of confidentiality is not only sacrosanct as a matter of journalistic ethics but relatively secure as a matter of law."

And with that, the Los Angeles Times reports that two New York Times reporters are being asked to reveal their sources in a trial. Attorneys for the co-defendant in the trial of indicted private investigator Anthony Pellicano are asking a U.S. District Court to demand the identity of the reporters' sources for an article published earlier this month.

Read full post…

“Well-placed sources,” “people close” to the situation, “two sources close” to decision-makers, “sources say,” “insiders,” and “a person close.” Those are the kinds of sourcing phrases you’d expect to see in a big story about, oh, say the rationale for invading Iraq. Today, they’re characterizations reserved for stories about Katie Couric’s seemingly imminent decision to leave NBC News and become the new anchor for CBS News. If this were about weapons of mass destruction, would we believe they exist?

Of course this isn’t about war or government policy as much as it is about speculation and gossip. Don’t get me wrong, the stakes are very high for the network news divisions anytime a star of this magnitude is making a decision about a move like this. It would be a mistake to ignore that. But it’s amusing to see people whose jobs are ostensibly dedicated partly to digging information out of institutions play the “anonymous source” card to such a remarkable degree on a story like this.

Update: We've posted more on the relationship between Public Eye and CBS News.

Read full post…

Some of what’s been passing for news the past few days is resembling NFL free agency – gossip, rumor and insider gossip of job searching and who’s going to end up in, out and in different locations. While that’s all good and well for water-cooler talk, there’s a slightly more serious aspect to it when we’re talking about running the country.

Read full post…

With a weekend of Woodward wonderings under our belts, here are some media stories you just shouldn’t miss.



Los Angeles Times media writer Tim Rutten has a great take on the Woodward fallout:

“There is something singularly appropriate about the fact that the Plame affair should involve Woodward, whose skillful and courageous use of the ur-voice among confidential sources virtually created a whole genre of Washington reporting. It's a journalistic strategy style dependent on the cultivation of access to well-placed officials greased by promises of "confidentiality." It's a way of doing journalism that still serves its practitioners' career interests, but less and less often their readers or viewers because it's a game the powerful and well-connected have learned to play to their own advantage.”

New York Times ombudsman Byron Calame looks at the ongoing policing of anonymous sources at the paper:

“Since I believe confidential sources should and will remain an essential tool in the best newsrooms, helping readers understand the motivation of those unnamed informants is a goal worth maximum effort at The Times. … Anonymous sourcing can be both a blessing and a curse for journalism -- and for readers. The system that Mr. Keller and Mr. Siegal have put in place has the potential to help The Times reap the blessings and minimize many of the curses. But their commitment to top-level oversight, and to providing sufficient editing attention to ignite those "daily conversations" about sources, has to be sustained long after the recent clamor over the paper's use of anonymous sourcing has faded away.”

Slate contributor Daniel Engber gives us the super-secret decoder ring to enable us to translate anonymous sources (sort of):

“Senior administration officials don't have to come from the White House. Cabinet secretaries are undoubtedly senior, and some reporters extend the title to their deputies and undersecretaries. Even a few officials at the assistant secretary level might merit "senior" designation. Given these possibilities, the population of senior officials in the administration could number well over 100.”

Read full post…