"They are uninformative and give readers the impression that our anonymity rules are on autopilot. Saying that a source insisted on anonymity because he was "not authorized" to speak is usually stating the obvious, and is of little or no help to a reader. Yet we've used that formulation nearly 300 times in the past year." —New York Times standards editor Phil Corbett in a memo to staff chastising them for getting lazy about confidential sourcing.
- 1. All My Exes Live in Texts: Why the Social Media Generation Never Really Breaks Up
- 2. 17 Awesome and Inspiring Facts About Nelson Mandela
- 3. American Horror Story’s Taissa Farmiga on Threesomes, Zombies, and Paris Hilton’s Closet
- 4. Gilmore Girls Alumni: Where Are They Now?
- 5. Seven Ways Tonight’s The Sound of Music Will Differ From the Classic Film
- 6. James Bond Shoots Child in Today’s Most Unfortunate Subway Ad Placement
- 7. The Whispered Attacks That Could Sink This Year's Oscar Contenders
- 8. Joe Jonas: My Life As a Jonas Brother
- 9. What Thirteen People Wore to Their Interview With Anna Wintour