sources

Journalistic sources are defined as actors from whom journalists get information using newsgathering techniques such as interviews and observations. This information can include quotes, background information, story suggestions, or eyewitness accounts. Sources are therefore actors outside the news organization itself who provide information subsidies and can be actors who are interviewed by e-mail, in person, or by telephone, as well as documents containing relevant information. This entry discusses the types of sources and their use in the news process, ethical and legal aspects of sourcing, power in journalist-source relations, the use of online sources, journalists’ verification of sources, and audiences’ views on journalistic sources.

Sources can be differentiated into types, which some authors classify in a source hierarchy based on perceived trustworthiness from the perspective of the journalist. Traditionally, official sources such as ministries and other government institutions are thought of as the most trustworthy sources, followed by professional sources, which include, for example, nongovernmental organizations or companies from the economic sector. The third type is nonprofessional sources such as citizens who are not in the public eye for professional reasons. A fourth type, actors from the media system itself such as correspondents and news agencies, can be added. This classification is based on the proximity to journalistic standards that sources usually exhibit when presenting information. Official and especially journalistic sources are used to adapting their communication style to the needs of journalists. Nonprofessional sources such as private citizens, on the other hand, usually do not take journalistic demands into account when posting reports of their experiences on social media platforms.

In journalism research, as early as 1979, Herbert Gans postulated that it was sources that led journalists to the topics of reporting. Zvi Reich called sources the cornerstones of journalistic activities such as detecting, researching, and verifying news. They provide journalists with information and thus the raw material on which further reporting is based. As a rule, it is sources, not journalists, who witness events that are potentially worth reporting. In academic definitions of journalism, sources also play a prominent role: Denis McQuail defines journalism as construction and publication of contemporary events based on reliable sources. Journalists need sources, especially when facts are not verifiable or are controversial. Sources can be used to manifest the facts and lend authority to information.

Discover how ordinary objects work, and expand your understanding of the familiar.

SIGN UP

" height="20" alt="HEW Logo">

Thank you for signing up!"

Back to homepage

By clicking "Sign Up", you consent to the Britannica Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Sources in the News Process

Despite their ascribed importance, in journalism research, sources were somewhat underrepresented for a long time. The theory of news values and research on gatekeepers and social psychological approaches conceptualize news decisions from the perspective of journalists without placing sources at the center of consideration. Activities of journalists in relation to sources are often summarized under the terms of newsgathering or sourcing. Also, theories of news production localize sources mainly at the beginning of the process as suppliers of information, which are consulted by journalists.

As a result of the sociological turn in journalism research, journalists were then increasingly viewed in an organizational context and the idea of an autonomously acting gatekeeper who selects sources was rejected. With this change of perspective, the sources of information inevitably move more into the focus of interest, although the actual relationship to sources is only present in an approach that places sources in the context of social interactions. In reciprocal models, the relationship between sources and journalists is described as a process of exchange and ongoing social relationship, in which the gathering of information is not a single event but the result of complex interactions between the two actors. This process of “finding the truth” is described as the epistemology of news reporting, which is defined by rules and routines that operate within a social setting, and determines how journalists obtain their knowledge. Knowledge is not understood as the product of an objective and rational analysis of reality, but as the result of an intersubjective negotiation process. Barbie Zelizer refers to the place where meanings are constructed, shared, and redefined as the interpretive community of journalism. According to this approach, the relationship between journalists and their sources can be described as a negotiation of meaning between multiple groups, each of which is located in different interpretive communities with their own patterns of interpretation.

Ethical and Legal Aspects of Sourcing

In this negotiation, journalists have the obligation to protect their sources. Source protection is a central component of numerous codes of ethics, according to which it is always wrong to fail to protect the source. This ethical responsibility toward journalistic sources is, however, also legally anchored in some countries in the form of the so-called shield laws. In Sweden, for example, journalists can be prosecuted for disclosing their sources.

Source protection as a legally protected good is the exception rather than the rule; nonetheless, journalists face potential sanctions if they do not protect their sources. Without certain protective mechanisms, potential sources could be deterred from passing on important information to journalists, who would then no longer be able to adequately perform their task as the fourth estate. The protection of sources gains special importance in the case of whistleblowers, in which investigative reporters and sources collaborate to reveal abuses of power. For journalists, this kind of reporting can pose challenges, such as the establishment of secure communication channels and considerations about surveillance of their own activities.

Explore Britannica Premium!

The trusted destination for professionals, college students, and lifelong learners.

SUBSCRIBE

Power in Journalist–Source Relations

In the description of the relationship between sources and journalists, a substantial part of the literature has focused on which voices get heard in the news. In many cases, this research is framed under the label of power and examines dependency in the relationship between sources and journalists. The power relations between reporters and their sources depend on various contextual factors: the story itself, the source, and the social, cultural, political, and economic contexts. Thus, the reporter–source relationship can range from a goal-oriented exchange of information to a struggle for the sovereignty of interpretation in the presentation of information.

The level of dependency on sources can be differentiated according to the stages of news production. In the news discovery phase, the agenda-building theory assumes that issues arise in an interplay between media, politics, and society. Particularly in routine reporting, journalists are guided by planned events such as press conferences, press releases, and news agencies and tend to remain passive. In the news selection phase, not only the perceived relevance of an issue contributes to the decision to select it for coverage, but also the availability of sources and the accessibility of information. Sources who adjust their information to journalistic needs are, therefore, privileged in news reporting.

In the newsgathering phase, sources gain in importance because journalists try to identify additional perspectives and cross-check previous information. In the presentation phase, Gaye Tuchman described strategic rituals journalists use to preserve objectivity. Sources play a major role in these rituals. For example, they enable journalists to distance themselves from the information displayed in the journalistic piece.

Empirical research on the relation between sources and journalists has often referred to the tango metaphor to ask who exerts greater influence in shaping the news. Gans stated that sources usually lead the tango. More recent studies found power relations to be dependent on contextual factors such as cultural differences, the kind of story journalists cover, and working conditions of journalists. However, most studies agree that authoritative sources such as government officials or academic experts dominate the news. Citizens are mainly present as eyewitnesses in crisis events, breaking news situations, or to represent the public opinion in vox pops. In routine coverage, citizens only play a minor role.

Digitalization and Journalistic Sources

The rise of digital media has significantly changed the relationship between sources and journalists. First, sources no longer depend on journalism to spread their messages to the audience. For example, populist politicians heavily use these new possibilities to communicate directly. This also has consequences for power in the relationship between sources and journalists, because sources can bypass the filter, and journalistic coverage is not the only channel to reach a broader audience.

Second, the ability of journalists to access content generated by users dramatically increased. The availability of user-generated content as potential raw material and the presence of diverse voices online led scholars to assume that journalistic coverage would begin to include more nonelite sources. However, this optimism was not fulfilled as user-generated content often does not fulfill journalistic standards, which increases the hurdle to be integrated in news coverage. Some studies have noted an increase in social media in the news, but also stated that this material is mainly used to illustrate opinions of a range of sources. Other studies have found that journalists seldom base stories on online sources and rather use them as a supplement. Overall, the impression prevails that journalists, at least in routine reporting, use digital tools only as a new access route to established sources.

Third, social media not only offer unlimited access to raw material but also pose the challenge of how to determine the trustworthiness of sources and the credibility of their material. Techniques such as geo-location of pictures or forensic processes to identify fake videos are incorporated in newsrooms or offered as a service by external organizations. Additionally, not only the direct use of social media material is problematic with regard to verification, but also using social media as a tool for story detection in the sense of ambient journalism involves risks for journalists. Large-scale disinformation campaigns could bias the public opinion journalists perceive when monitoring social media.

Verification of Journalistic Sources

Bill Kovach and Tom Rosenstiel describe journalism as a “discipline of verification,” which has developed norms such as objectivity, rules, and routines in the collection, selection, and presentation of valid information. Journalists need to determine if a source tries to be accurate and honest, or if they only offer self-serving information. Verification is essential for the ability of journalism to provide fair and accurate reporting. The drive for accuracy is a core value of journalism and defines acceptable professional behavior in the sourcing and presentation of information.

In the context of digital media, journalism must develop strategies to deal with the speed and abundance of material on social media platforms. The conflict between accuracy of information and speed of reporting is particularly present in the online context. Breaking-news situations are the point of culmination when the flow of information is usually chaotic and contradictory, and journalists’ verification efforts are also visible to recipients. According to the findings of some studies, verification is neglected in these crisis situations and is only carried out after publication.

The standards for assessing the trustworthiness of sources from the perspective of journalists have apparently changed as a result of social media. Since verification is a very time-consuming and resource-intensive process, several authors have identified alternative ways in which journalists can arm themselves against attacks on their objectivity without having to investigate every last detail of information. Studies dealing with the process of verification have found that in many cases, journalists rely on trust relationships with sources to shorten the process of verification. Other studies have tried to investigate the steps journalists follow when verifying sources.

Audience Perspective on Journalistic Sources

Sources do fulfill different functions for journalists in the phase of news discovery and gathering, but also in the phase of news presentation. Journalists use sources to fulfill the norm of objectivity, which requires the presentation of supporting evidence and conflicting possibilities. How transparent journalists are with regard to their sourcing practices differs, and this in turn affects the audience.

How the audience views journalistic sources is not at the center of journalism research and has received less attention compared to journalistic sourcing. Nonetheless, journalists’ handling of sources is crucial for the audience’s evaluation of the quality of journalism. In general, the news audience seems to value quotes, the mentioning of sources, their proximity to the news event, and a high status of the source. On the other hand, some types of sources such as public relations are rated as untrustworthy in general. If sources provide uncertain information that is nonetheless newsworthy, journalists have to solve the dilemma by providing the audience with enough information to judge the source and at the same time avoiding the impression that the whole journalistic piece is untrustworthy. In this case, transparency about sources can evoke uncertainty on the side of the audience.

With regard to online sources of information used in news stories, empirical evidence is mixed suggesting that the audience does not perceive the use of offline sources as more credible than online sources. Only very eye-catching displays of social media posts within a story, such as screenshots of tweets, might negatively influence the credibility. Additionally, the need for transparency seems to differ between online and offline recipients of news. People who regularly use online news expect journalists to disclose more details about sources than offline users do.

The original version of this article was published by SAGE Publications in The SAGE Encyclopedia of Journalism.