Writers’ source a key resource:

Admirable attributes of attribution

Gaston De ROSAYRO

If someone has given you information that you are using in your news or feature story you will need to identify your source and explain why that person is worth listening to. This is attribution.

A journalism professor may have an interesting opinion on the finance minister’s economic policy, but his opinion would be worthless in a news story unless he is also qualified to speak as an economist. Columnists and commentators can use themselves as the authority for the correctness of the news, but such a privilege does not extend to the ordinary news writer.

Readers would want to know where the story came from and why they should believe it. When possible always identify the source fully. Give the person’s full name and also his or her title. Also some affiliation to show the reader that the person is worth quoting.

The next best attribution is the name of the source’s organisation, group or office. Any time the information in your story comes from a source and not from your own firsthand observations it should be attributed. A good rule of thumb is to attribute once per paragraph. It may seem repetitive, but it is important for reporters to be clear about where their information originates.

The least satisfactory attribution is some variation of the phrase “informed sources.” This form of attribution is necessary if the origin of the news must be held in confidence. In some cases, your sources of information may not want to be named, for fear of reprisals.

Journalists who are sure of their facts often attribute such information to “usually reliable sources”, “informed sources” or “sources within the government, department or company”.In some cases, they use phrases such as “it is widely believed that” or “it is understood that”. Be warned! If your information is wrong, the blame will rest at your door.

In cases where fact and opinion are not easily separated, play safe and attribute the story.And remember that attributing a statement to someone else is no defence in a claim for defamation. If you wrongly accuse a person of being a thief, it is no excuse to say that you were just quoting someone else.

The insistence on sources sometimes causes inexperienced writers to clutter their leads. Titles or names of news sources, locations or news conferences and other necessary and not consequential details need not always be crammed into leads.

The good journalist has to strike a balance between the need to make clear attribution of statements and the risk of boring the reader with too many phrases such as “he said”.It helps to change the word “said” occasionally, in attributing both quotes and reported speech.

Some useful alternatives are “warned”, “suggested”, “urged”, “asked” and “disclosed”. But again beware: because each of these has a specific meaning. Check that it is the correct one for what your speaker said and the way they said it.

The phrase “according to” can be used in attributing reported speech, but do not use it more than once with any single speaker.

Although it is usually a neutral term, not suggesting either belief or disbelief, if you use it too often it can give the impression that you doubt the information the speaker has given.There are other, more obvious danger words to avoid such as “stated” and “pointed out.” They both imply that what the speaker said is an undisputed fact. You can, for example, point out that the world is round, but you cannot point out that this cake is delicious, because that is an opinion.

Also avoid the word “claimed”, which suggests that you do not believe what is being said. Be especially careful when reporting court cases.

Lawyers and the police like to use the word “claimed” to throw doubt on opposition statements. You must not do the same.The exact balance of attribution depends on the kind of story you are writing or the material you can use.

If the statements are reliably factual throughout, you only need to attribute occasionally. If, however, the story is heavy with opinion or unreliable statements, you should attribute at least once every two sentences.

One of the greatest dangers facing the young journalist is accepting what people say as the truth. Just because someone tells you that something is a fact, does not make it so.There are some things which are universally accepted as true, for example that the world is round, that Tuesday follows Monday, that Sri Lanka is an island in the Indian Ocean.

But there are also things which people want you to believe are true but which are either not provable or are lies. These people may not knowingly tell a lie, but many people are careless with the truth.Also, situations may change, so that the truth at one moment may be wrong the next. Attribution helps you to overcome some of these problems. Attribution is the act of specifying who said what.

If you attribute the words to the person who said them, you do not have to prove or disprove the veracity of their words. You simply report them. Also, people judge what is said by the person who says it. Statements made by people in authority carry more weight than statements made by other people.

Names in your story must also be accurate. There can be no compromise on this. Never, ever get a person’s name wrong. Close enough is not accurate enough. Even if a man tells you his name is Perera don’t assume you know how to spell it. Ask him if it can be spelt Perera, Pereira or Ferreira. Even Western and Sri Lankan common names can have different spellings. Safer still ask for a calling card.

There are a multitude of factors that tend to condition the acceptance of sources as bona fide by investigative journalists. Reporters are expected to develop and cultivate sources, especially if they regularly cover a specific topic, known as a “beat”.

Beat reporters must, however, be cautious of becoming too close to their sources. Reporters often, but not always, give greater leeway to sources with little experience.

For example, sometimes a person will say they don’t want to talk, and then proceed to talk. If that person is not a public figure, reporters are less likely to use that information. As a general rule, but especially when reporting on controversy, reporters are expected to use multiple sources.

And however good you think your memory is always recheck and look up things you quote. Also never, repeat, never assume anything. Journalists are also encouraged to be sceptical without being cynical. If your mother says she loves you, check it out.