Principles: Sources

Newsgathering, whether investigative or routine, lives and dies based on the quality of its sources of information. The more controversial the story, the more critical the credibility of sources becomes.

Our standards apply to all types of sources, including those coming via social media, when they are used for news gathering purposes.

There are two relationships at stake here – our relationship with the audience, and our relationship with the source.

Sources may be risking a great deal by sharing information. It is important that we are clear and explicit from the outset as to the degree of protection we are prepared to offer and how the information will be used (e.g. “on” or “off the record”).

This same clarity is necessary in our relationship with our audiences. We are clear about the relationship with the source. We let people know as precisely as possible where and from whom the information comes. This helps them evaluate that information and to put facts into context.

The values of accuracy, fairness and integrity guide our handling of sources and the information they bring.

Double Sourcing

Our commitment to accuracy and integrity means we try where possible to verify the information with a second source. And there may be times when more than two sources are required.

Our stories are based on information we have verified. Wherever possible, our stories use first-hand, identifiable sources – participants in an event or authenticated documents.

The importance of second sourcing is influenced by the nature and quality of the primary source.

If the primary source is confidential, we will, to the best of our ability, attempt to verify the accuracy of the information through independent corroboration.

We will refer any decision to publish a story based on a single confidential source to the Director.

Payment to Sources

To ensure we maintain our independence, we do not pay for information from a source in a story.

However, payment of fees at recognized rates to specialists for an expert report or a scientific analysis is acceptable. This is not chequebook journalism. In this context the payment of fees need not be reported on air.

Increasingly, audience members are becoming contributors; providing photos or footage of news events. As WNews does pay for freelance content, it may be appropriate, in rare circumstances, to pay for authenticated content. A decision to do so must be referred to the Director.

Recording of Conversation or Pre-interview with a Source

We often record our conversations with information sources or potential guests for note-taking purposes. This is common practice and is generally done openly, but may be done with or without the interviewee’s knowledge.

Whether made with or without the source’s knowledge, recordings of conversations or pre-interviews are generally not published. We are aware that publication of this type of material could undermine a source’s confidence in journalists. It could also have legal or regulatory consequences.

We accordingly take care to explore all alternatives to publication of this type of material, in keeping with our journalistic values. We will publish it only in cases when it is in the public interest and publication is the best way to ensure the accuracy, fairness and balance of our report.

Any proposal to broadcast a recording made without the knowledge of the interviewee is referred to the Director.

Agreements with Sources

Our stories are based on information we have verified. Wherever possible, our stories use first-hand, identifiable sources – participants in an event or authenticated documents.

Before we agree to any conditions that would limit our use of information, we are explicit about what those conditions are. We also come to agreement with the source before the information is shared.

We can agree to talk to a source “off the record”, which means information cannot be used in a published form, nor can the source be named.

We can also agree to publish information from a source, but without identifying that source, in one of two ways:

• A confidential source is when the journalist knows the identity of the person, but agrees to protect their identity.
• An anonymous source is when the identity of the source is not known to the journalist. Use of such sources should be referred to the Managing Editor.

Information obtained from confidential or anonymous sources should be verified before it is released.

Protection of Sources: Granting Confidentiality

Our ability to protect sources allows people with important information to come forward and expose matters of public interest. If we do not properly protect our confidential sources, potential sources will not trust us. This compromises our ability to expose abuses of power.

We offer protection to sources based on such factors as: the potential impact and importance of the information on the lives of Canadians and its potential influence on public policy.

We also consider the extent of personal or professional hardship and possible danger the source may face if his/her identity becomes known.

We must make efforts to establish the source’s credibility and/or find means to corroborate the information.

Once we have undertaken to protect a source, we ensure no details that could lead to identification are revealed. We are careful in the use of research material. We use the best technical tools to hide an identity for broadcast.

Whenever confidentiality is granted, both the journalist and the source must be fully aware that this commitment extends to WNews as well, and is not merely limited to the journalist granting it.

There may be legal implications in granting protection. Journalists should be familiar with relevant regulation or seek legal guidance.

Before a confidential source is used in a story or a story is published based on the information provided, the Managing Editor must be told who the source is, and what the agreement entails.

Disclosure of sources within the journalistic line of responsibility should not be confused with public disclosure of sources.

Seniority of required approvals will depend

upon the scope and scale of the story and its potential impact on people or institutions.

Sources often insist that we agree not to name them before they agree to talk with us.

We must be reluctant to grant this as our credibility to our readers is huge.

In the case in which we do decide to use an unnamed source, we are asking our readers to take an extra step to trust the credibility of the information we are providing. In this case, we must be certain in our own minds that the benefit to readers is worth the cost in credibility in order to get the story.

Protecting Identifies/Confidential Sources Policies

If the person request that they are protected, depending on the nature of the story and the risk, we will do the following stages of protection.

1. Name Change: We will change the name of the person in the story and put that the following at the bottom of the story. “Due to the nature of this story, we changed the names in the story to protect the identity of the person involved”
2. Redaction of Name: As sole determinant by the editor or CNO, the name could be redacted and change to Jane Doe for Females, John Doe for Males.
3. Audio Change: some stories may require a audio pitch change which changes the pitch of the person voice to protest their identity.
4. Blackout of person: Should the person life is at risk due to the nature of the story or report, we will do a blackout of the person if recording for broadcast. This would also include a audio pitch change of the person to protect their identity. During the broadcast, we will put a alias name instead of the actual name. In this situation, the interview will be more likely to be recorded and edited.

Identification of Interviewees

We are open and straightforward when we present interviewees and their statements. We make every effort to disclose the identity of interviewees and to give the context and explanations necessary for the audience to judge the relevance and credibility of their statements. In exceptional cases and for serious cause, we may decide to withhold such information in whole or in part. In such cases we explain the situation to the audience without disclosing the information that must be kept secret.

Use of Leaked Documents

Leaked documents from known or anonymous sources can provide important research for a story.

When we receive leaked documents, we verify the authenticity, corroborate the information they contain, and carefully assess the motives of the person who leaked them.

There are also times when the content of the documents or the fact of their existence is an important part of the story. If we have agreed to protect the identity of the person who has provided the material, we are careful that the publication of the leaked documents does not inadvertently identify the source.

There may be national security or legal issues attached to the possession and publication of some leaked documents. We will take these issues into account and seek legal advice.

The decision to publish leaked documents raising legal or national security concerns is referred to the General Manager and Editor in Chief.

Data Journalism

Many organizations share data with the public through websites and online databases.

Our Journalistic Standards and Practices apply to journalists, developers and programmers who gather, analyze, visualize and report on this data.

Web scrapers can be used as a way to extract publicly available information from websites in a short time frame.

When using web scrapers, we strive to be transparent toward the organization hosting the data.

We also take reasonable steps to minimize any performance impact our web scrapers may have on servers and other public users of a website.

When we judge it to be in the public interest, we may also decide to use clandestine methods to obtain the data (see chapter Principles – Clandestine methods). This may involve legal considerations. Before doing so, we obtain approval from the Director.