In his March 13, 2007 column on the Christian Science Monitor website, Project for Excellence in Journalism Sr. Associate Dante Chinni argues that journalists are getting sloppy in the way they grant anonymity - too often failing to fight to get sources "on-record" and giving in to anonymity requests that may not be necessary. He uses the "Libby Leak" and Balco steroids trials as examples.

Chinni writes:

...Journalists increasingly grant confidentiality and anonymity the way many Americans run up credit card charges – too easily. As a result, the notion of anonymous sourcing has spread from reluctant whistle-blowers and highly sensitive sources to virtually anyone. Even Capitol Hill press secretaries – paid for by taxpayer money – are now routinely anonymous, and all they are trying to do is float stories to make their bosses look good.

Most journalists will tell you that sources now often ask for anonymity before "revealing" information that is readily obtainable elsewhere. And those actions have led to a more cavalier dispensing of such agreements...

...To prevent sources from gaming the system, journalists may need to put a few provisos on that guarantee. It may be time to say "I'll grant you anonymity and hold to the deal, provided you are straight with me and don't legally hang me out to dry..."

...If journalists don't treat confidentiality seriously, then they may wind up facing just two options: (1) Come forward and reveal an anonymous source and risk being labeled a chiseller or (2) honor the confidentiality agreement and accept that they've been used.

In a profession that thrives on reputation, those are pretty poor choices...

Click here to read Chinni's column in its entirety on the Christian Science Monitor website.