JOURNALISTS AND SOURCE GREASERS (REVISITED).

JOURNALISTS AND SOURCE GREASERS (REVISITED). Almost a year ago, I posted here about some of the problems that arise when journalists rely on anonymous sources. Not only does the reader not know what the source’s agenda is; he can never tell when the journalist is slanting an unrelated story to make one of his sources look good (Mickey Kaus had referred to a related practice is “source greasing.”)

In the New York Review of Books for October 25, there is a review by Russell Baker of Robert Novak’s new autobiograpy, PRINCE OF DARKNESS:50 YEARS OF REPORTING IN WASHINGTON, which describes some problems with sources. It is possible to be an innocent source, but “Novak’s only entrant in the innocent category is Robert Matsui, a California Democratic Congressman.” (Remember this is over 50 years of reporting.) Novak acknowledges that some one who chose not to be a source, could become a target for Novak. The example he gives is Robert Haldeman: “‘Bob Haldeman was treated more harshly because he refused any connection with me. He made himself more of a target than he had to be by refusing to be a source.'” And a source could be protected: “Alexander Haig was protected frankly as a longtime source of [Novak’s longtime partner, Rowland Evans].” All this makes it hard for those outside the Beltway to evaluate what we read, although Baker cites two sources, Congressman Melvin Laird and Robert Strauss, a longtime Democratic party heavyweight, where what Kaus would call “source greasing” was so obvious over the years that my brother Elmer noticed it.

This entry was posted in History, Journalism. Bookmark the permalink.

1 Response to JOURNALISTS AND SOURCE GREASERS (REVISITED).

  1. Pingback: WHAT IS EXPECTED WHEN AN INTERVIEW IS GRANTED. | Pater Familias

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *