In this article published in The Irish Times on April 7, journalist Paul Cullen made use of off diary and unattributable sources as opposed to the everyday 'on diary' primary definers of the news like spokespeople or press officers.
In doing this, Cullen was able to get a 'scoop' out of a story that had already been wrung dry, setting The Times apart from other newspapers that day and enabling them to be used as a source of information to other media outlets.
Perhaps it would have been an even bigger news story had the identity of the sources been revealed but obviously Cullen promised that their identity would be kept secret in exchange for their information.
Cullen could have revealed their identity anyway as his promise wouldn't have been legally binding but the journalist-source relationship is usually one of complete trust and understanding. The 'informed sources' that Cullen makes reference to in the article have probably provided him with leaked information before and in order to make use of their services again in the future, he would need to keep to his word.
Cullen could have revealed their identity anyway as his promise wouldn't have been legally binding but the journalist-source relationship is usually one of complete trust and understanding. The 'informed sources' that Cullen makes reference to in the article have probably provided him with leaked information before and in order to make use of their services again in the future, he would need to keep to his word.
Good sources in journalism are hard to come by and very valuable so it's important for journalists to treat sources well and to keep their promises but it's also important for one to keep their distance in order to maintain objectivity. If a journalist becomes too close to their source, their journalism is at risk of being bias or unbalanced.
