In Praise of Anonymous Sources
I’m always amazed when people complain about stories based on anonymous sources. In general, anonymous sources about politics or finance are better than people who are willing to speak on the record. That’s because politics and finance don’t reward openness and honesty, so anyone willing to speak to you is probably lying. Anonymous sources lie and have agendas as well, but at least there is a vague possibility they are being honest.
Take the complaints about Jeffrey Rosen’s takedown of Sonia Sotomayor, the woman widely viewed as the front-runner for Obama’s first Supreme Court appointment. He quotes a bunch of anonymous sources, outraging the righteous stupids among us. Take this from Wonkette:
Let Wonkette : Is Frontrunner Mexican Lady Judge A Dumb? Anonymous Sources Think So!
Think about what the alternative to anonymous sourcing on this story is. Certainly no practicing attorney or sitting judge is going to go on the record as deeply critical about a woman who might be about to be appointed to the Supreme Court. The only people who would openly oppose her would be her political opponents on the right. This would create a false image that the only criticism of her comes from political enemies.
So these righteous stupids would rather create a false impression of reality rather than rely on anonymous sources to fill in the gaps.
As Obama would say, I don’t stand with them. The Supreme Court is just too important.
