So I have some questions for The New Yorker editors. How do you fact-check Hersh and do those methods coincide with your overall policies (if any)? Do you know the names of his anonymous sources?
ZOMG. If only there was some way we could answer these questions...
"Seymour Hersh writes about intelligence for us," says Remnick, "and he often quotes from sources without attribution. But as editor, I know exactly who each of these sources is. And the fact-checkers will speak with the sources and will ascertain that they stand behind the words. When Hersh speaks with a source, he will ask him if he is willing to speak with the fact-checkers."
And in this way The New Yorker's readers can be sure that the reference to a "highly-placed source" is not charlatanism or deceit?
"Yes, but in terms of the readers, it is still very problematic, and I most certainly prefer to attribute quotes by name. This is not always possible, however. Without unnamed sources we would not have had Watergate."
No comments:
Post a Comment