I’m pleased to share another guest article with you from my good friend Joe Wisinski.
Joe worked as a newspaper reporter and editor, a radio news announcer, and as the executive producer of the web site at a 24-hour TV news station. He currently is an adjunct professor at the University of Tampa.
I was also an executive producer at the same TV station in Tampa and worked closely with Joe. I had the privilege of speaking to Joe’s class at UT and getting to know his students.
I’m pleased to share Joe’s guest article with you about where journalists get their sources.
A friend recently asked me “Where do journalists get their sources?”
It’s a good question. For news consumers who want accurate and unbiased reporting, it’s important to know who a news outlet’s sources are, along with how media found them.
For example, a recent news report said Italy and Greece are easing some COVID-19 restrictions for travelers. But before anyone grabs their passport and packs their luggage they’d want to know if the reported news is accurate. So, who did the journalists interview to get their information? Can those people, and hence the report, be trusted?
This article explains how journalists develop their sources.
A daunting problem
It’s arguable that finding suitable sources is the most difficult challenge journalists face. They must be knowledgeable, willing to talk, and preferably articulate. And, unless media is specifically seeking subjective comment on a controversial issue, the source must be unbiased. The people that journalists want to interview must also be available. Finding a good person to talk to won’t help a reporter if he or she can’t get together with that person before a deadline.
But it’s not enough to find people who meet the above qualifications. News outlets also need a wide variety of sources.
The five types of sources
These are the categories of people media should reach out to:
Primary: those most closely connected to a story
Secondary: those with a significant association, but not as deeply involved as a primary
Experts: What qualifies a person as an expert? Anyone can claim the title. Media needs people with education and experience.
Spokespeople: those whose duties include speaking on an organization’s or individual’s behalf
MOS: this is an acronym for Man On the Street. (Yes, that designation excludes half of humanity. The term is outdated, but it’s still widely used.) An MOS is someone with no direct association to a story, but who probably has an opinion.
For example, say a political candidate is in town for a speech and a mass media outlet does a story. These are some people they could talk to (note that some types may overlap and it may be difficult to categorize a given source):
Primary: the candidate herself
Secondary: someone who attended the speech
Experts: a political science professor, or perhaps a skilled political commentator
Spokesperson: the candidate’s official proxy
MOS: the MOS may not even know that candidate gave a local speech. But if she or he has an opinion then an interesting element gets added to the story.
This is not to say that reporters must talk to all five types for every story. Indeed, that would be overkill for most stories. But they should reach out to as many as practical. That results in the best, most well-rounded report. What if, in the above case, a journalist got quotes or soundbites from only the candidate and her spokesperson? That would hardly be reliable, unbiased information.
If a news outlet consistently interviews only one or two types of sources, they may not—unintentionally or otherwise—be providing the most complete, accurate, and unbiased information.
A real-life situation
Let’s see an example of gathering sources for a typical story. A city council is discussing the issue of short-term rentals, that is, homes that are listed on websites as being available for a few days or weeks. The council’s concern regards legal issues for both homeowners and the city if nefarious activities take place in rented homes.
A TV station ran the story and interviewed these people:
The city council president
A homeowner who currently rents her home on a short-term basis
A homeowner living near where others rent their homes
We might classify those sources as:
Primary: the city council member
Secondary: the homeowner and the neighbor
There were no interviews with experts, spokespeople, or an MOS. So who else could reporters have talked to? Some possibilities are:
An expert: an attorney who understands the potential legal problems
A spokesperson: someone authorized to speak on behalf of a short-term rental website
MOS: virtually anyone. The MOS may know as much about short-term rentals as most people know about nuclear engineering, but probably has an opinion that could add interesting color.
To be fair, it’s possible that the station asked other people to appear on camera, but they declined. It’s common for potential sources to not respond to requests from media, for whatever reason. When that happens, the news outlet should let news consumers know they tried. Here’s an example from CNN: “The sheriff’s office declined multiple interview requests.” At least viewers know that CNN made a good faith effort to reach a significant source.
Where have I seen that person before?
There’s one other point about seeking a wide variety of sources. Anyone who consumes much news notices that media tend to talk to the same people repeatedly. A TV news director I worked with would periodically remind us to avoid this practice, and he was right. But reporters sometimes do utilize the same sources over and over because they’re reachable, they’re willing to talk, and they’ll provide a thoughtful quotation or soundbite. News consumers should be wary if they see the same talking heads every day.
There’s another issue with this: if you’re seeing the same people repeatedly it may be that they’re being paid. The matter gets dicey here. In some cases, paid sources are acceptable. For example, political pundits, that is, experts, may be on retainer because of their experience and knowledge. Perhaps their qualifications include having worked for the government or earning a PhD. But other types of sources should never be paid.
A practical example
Say you’re a journalist and writing a story about the nationwide problem of drinking and driving. Who are your primary, secondary, expert, and spokesperson going to be?
Here are some ideas:
Primary: Some possibilities are a drinking and driving crash victim, or a person who received a DUI or caused a DUI-related crash.
Secondary: You could talk to family members of a DUI-related crash victim, a prosecutor who attempts to convict those charged with DUI, or an attorney who defends them.
Expert: While working as a print and website reporter I sometimes accompanied law enforcement officers as they patrolled for drinking drivers. Those officers were experts on DUI issues.
Spokespeople: A spokesperson for an anti-DUI organization is a logical choice.
MOS: A typical MOS has no direct connection with drinking and driving. It’s never directly affected him or her. But no doubt the MOS has an opinion.
You can readily see how interviewing someone from each category, or at least as many as feasible, rounds out the story and gives it depth.
How do journalists find sources?
Let’s take our scenario a bit further and consider how we’d reach our potential sources.
Primary: Finding a DUI victim might be tricky. Perhaps I personally know someone. Or I might email my newsroom colleagues asking if they do. Or I could have our website post a message asking a victim to contact us. An anti-drinking and driving organization might be able to put me in touch with someone who’s willing to talk.
Secondary: Again, finding a victim’s family member might be tough. I’d try the same techniques as above. But I could easily find a prosecutor or defense attorney. The Internet would be my friend with a search for “state attorney’s office” or “DUI defense attorney.”
Expert: I would call a law enforcement agency seeking an officer with DUI-related experience.
Spokesperson: I’d get in touch with an anti-DUI agency such as MADD or RID (Remove Intoxicated Drivers).
MOS: To get a quotation or soundbite I’d walk up to random people and say, “I work for such-and-such a news outlet. I’m doing a story about drinking and driving. I’d like to get your opinion.”
So you see that finding sources is limited only by a journalist’s creativity and willingness to work.
A final word
As noted earlier, finding good sources is challenging. But understanding how journalists find them is critical to knowing we’re getting trustworthy news. You can even use your knowledge to assess the legitimacy of news outlets. Legitimate news organizations use sources that meet criteria outlined in this article. Less than legitimate outlets, not so much so.
As you consume news, it’s wise to ask:
How wide of a variety of people did the news outlet talk to?
How qualified were the sources?
How much bias did they demonstrate?
Does the news outlet interview the same people repeatedly?
Your answers to those questions go a long way in determining how reliable the place where you get your news is.
© Joe Wisinski, 2022
Comments Welcome
Thank you, Joe!
I hope his thoughts have been helpful to you as a journalist or news consumer. Please share your comments and we’ll respond as quickly as we can.
If you like this newsletter, please let your friends know about it so they can subscribe for free and receive it directly to their inbox on Tuesday mornings.
Next Newsletter
How would you grade the work journalists do? That’s the topic of our next newsletter.
Newsletter Purpose
The purpose of this newsletter is to help journalists understand how to do real journalism and the public know how they can find news they can trust on a daily basis. It’s a simple purpose, but complicated to accomplish. I’ll do my best to make it as clear as I can in future newsletters.