A Quote by Will Muschamp

There's no credibility in anonymous sources. — © Will Muschamp
There's no credibility in anonymous sources.
Sean Hannity is a hypocrite!He's blasting anonymous sources and saying journalism is dead when he uses an anonymous source in the form of President Trump.
Sure, some journalists use anonymous sources just because they're lazy and I think editors ought to insist on more precise identification even if they remain anonymous.
Sure, some journalists use anonymous sources just because they’re lazy, and I think editors ought to insist on more precise identification even if they remain anonymous.
Simply stated, sometimes journalists can only get their information from informants who must remain anonymous in order to protect their careers and sometimes even their lives: Watergate: Confidential sources. The Pentagon Papers: Confidential sources. Enron: Confidential sources.
There was an honorable tradition of using anonymous sources that was ruined by Jayson Blair.
I think it's a lack of journalistic integrity to print things with anonymous sources.
Most bloggers have no institutional credibility, and so they must build it, by linking transparently, and allowing you to easily double check their work. But more than anything, because linking sources is such an easy thing to do, and the motivations for avoiding links are so dubious, I've detected myself using a new rule of thumb: if you don't link to primary sources, I just don't trust you.
Sometimes, anonymous sources, when merely stating opinions or running a smear campaign, are certainly cowards.
Anonymous sources are to journalism what silicon enhancements are to the feminine figure; they look impressive to the gullible, but something doesn't feel right.
It's funny; we never had anything like credibility. Even though we all have some sort of punk-rock background, but so what? I really don't care about that. What's credibility anyway? Who has credibility?
I just don't see anonymous sources as fair against a candidate. I think if someone has a real concern, they should come out and say it.
If anonymous [Donald] Trump campaign sources are to be believed, they`re pretty concerned he`s going to blow the big debate Monday night with an utter lack of preparation.
Well, a lot of people don't want to be quoted. But keep in mind that Bob Woodward did all of his Watergate reporting with anonymous sources, and we know how that turned out.
Casual reliance on unnamed sources...corrodes our credibility and, in cases that are rare but not rare enough, may abet journalistic malpractice.
Anonymous sources are a practice of American journalism in the 20th and 21st century, a relatively recent practice. The literary tradition of anonymity goes back to the Bible.
Some of the best stories that I've gotten, that others have written about this administration, about the previous administration, you have to rely on anonymous sources.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!