3 ms·
Of course, if he published by himself, and his name in publicly known, then yes, nyt has no obligation for source unannonimity. The fact that the anonymous sour
by mola 6y ago
Of course, if he published by himself, and his name in publicly known, then yes, nyt has no obligation for source unannonimity. The fact that the anonymous source that published an editorial is a very different case.
The anonymous source didn't publish his writings in a personal blog, he would not have publish the op-ed under his name. So the only way to get that op-ed to be published is by ensuring anonymity.
These cases are not related in the slightest.
- leereeves 6y agoAt the very least, their statement shows that they recognize the harm that revealing someone's identity can cause. It also acknowledges that "many important stories in sensitive areas like politics, national security and business could never be" discussed without anonymity. Whether that discussion happens on the NYT or not is, IMO, irrelevant. I realize blogs are a threat to their business model, but that doesn't excuse targeting their authors.