More than a century ago, Henry M. Stanley of the New York Herald searched Africa for two years until he found a missing missionary, Dr. David Livingstone. Stanley’s expedition, along with the 72-day round-the-world trip of Hearst’s Nellie Bly in 1889, helped create the popular belief that a reporter will do- anything to get a story.
Although some journalists are reluctant to admit it, the myth has considerable foundation. Reporters have crashed parties and spied on closed meetings by crouching on window ledges. They have evaded police lines, smuggled film past federal officers, and commandeered or chartered vehicles without money or authorization. A few have joined volunteer fire departments or got themselves elected constable in order to drive cars with sirens and flashing red lights. They have used deception, impersonation, pursuit, and outright invasion every tactic that was legal and a few that weren’t. They have risked and often lost-their lives in combat, criminal investigations, exploration, and daredevil adventures. Like Ernest Hemingway, they have captured cities-or at least saloons-in advance of approaching armies. Like George Plimpton, they have taken physical punishment merely to write about it.
But, however frequent, such dramatic reporting stunts remain the exception rather than the rule Few reporters find it necessary to comb Africa, travel around the world, or venture into outer space to get a story. Indeed, the successful reporter often does nothing more exciting than pick up a telephone and makes half dozen calls. Reporters can do this, however, only if they have sources.
Perhaps unconsciously, reporters usually define “source” as a human being, an acquaintance in a key position who can be trusted to supply straight information. Many editors quarrel with this limited definition, criticizing what they consider a tendency to rely too: on word-of-mouth information. They argue with considerable justification that the best source is a written reporter document because its legal status and the care that has been taken in preparing it fortunately, documents aren’t always available especially when are dealing with fast-breaking news. Reporters still must rely on word-of-mouth information from newsmakers, their clerks and go betweens, and tipsters. More often than not, you must rely on sources in order to obtain documents as well.
To make certain they have plenty of sources, professional reporters are constantly compiling and revising lists. Some of the names on the list probably were supplied by the city editor, others inherited from other reporters, and still others culled from directories. Regardless of how they were acquired, the lists are constantly changing. Each election-general, municipal, or school district-calls for an up so do the private elections of lodges, professional societies, chambers of commerce, corporations, and trade associations.
Reporters fill address books and file folders with names, telephone numbers, standard biographical information, and other pertinent about their sources. Some of the personal information, however, may be kept only in their heads. They learn where their sources eat, drink and play, as well as where they normally work, so that they can be reached at any hour. Reporters learn which documents their sources handle routinely, which subjects they will talk about and which won’t, and how they can be coaxed or pressured. Reporters trade some of this information with fellow reporters and keep some to them- selves. After all, some of the information is confidential, and a reporter’s success often depends on his ability to respect a confidence.
Good news sources first must have access to special information. Second, they must be much like reporters, in that they recognize makings of a news story and act immediately. Instead of waiting to be called, good sources telephone the reporter day or night with scrap of information that might be important. Such sources seldom spring up overnight. A few—for example, public relations practitioners may have journalism training, but most are the product of long and careful cultivation by a journalist who has earned their trust.
Cultivation of the source is a form of low-key salesmanship and may amount to nothing more than a few minutes of conversation each week on the street, in the coffee shop, or at social events. The goal is merely to keep the source aware of your interest and expectations. A beat reporter may achieve this automatically during normal rounds. But reporters with no clearly defined beat may find it necessary to through their address books occasionally and telephone those sources whom they haven’t seen recently “just to visit.”
No amount of cultivation, of course, will make some potential informants cooperate regularly. These are sources that have information but are chronically reluctant to talk because some degree of secrecy is essential to their activities. They may be FBI agents, diplomats, bank examiners, or persons on the fringes of the underworld. News reporters often must take unusual steps merely to keep track of their source’s movements. For example, during the last years of prohibition in Oklahoma, the police reporter of the Daily Oklahoman found it helpful to memorize the auto license numbers of all the known bootleggers and gamblers in two counties. Some of his sources rewarded this effort by running his car off the road and shooting at him. Others, however, reluctantly cooperated after he pursued them.
Sources can be categorized in two broad heads: Primary Sources: sources that give first hand information (straight from the horse’s mouth)
Secondary Sources: sources that give second hand information. These sources are add-ons from archives, reference materials, books, newspaper records etc…
Recognizing the Sources: Anyone may on occasion become a news source. He or she need only (1) participate in a newsworthy action, (2) observe it, (3) know some person who did, or (4) have access to special information. To borrow an example from sports, a news source may be a player, a spectator, a confidant of one of these, or a statistician. He may also be a club owner, a coach, or the fellow who tried to fix the game—anyone or anything that has some information about the subject.
Some sources are acquired-literally by accident. Examples would be survivors and witnesses at a disaster scene. Unless you learn otherwise, you must assume that these are “untrained” sources, unaccustomed to speaking for publication. Such sources must be treated, although diplomatically, much the way witnesses would be treated in court: Are they mentally competent? Were they actually at the scene? Were they in a position to see and hear what happened? Was the light adequate? Are they impartial? And how much of what they are telling is merely hearsay?
Accidental sources may never be useful again. This may be the only time they will ever experience or witness anything worth putting into print. But you can’t be sure. It’s best to spend a few seconds getting acquainted, learning about an informant’s occupation, and taking his or her telephone number and address. Tell the source that you may want to phone later; never dose the door to possible future use.
Everyday Informants: The sources you want most are those you can use day after day. They can be divided roughly into two groups: (1) the highly visible sources, newsmakers and lesser public officials, whom the reporter must share regularly with competitors and fellow workers, and (2) those that are virtually the reporter’s private property by right of discovery or special attention. Each reporter tries to increase the membership of the second group without overlooking or failing to cultivate members of the first.
Shared or private, most sources are in some sense members of the community power structure. They can be found in government, business, the school system, charitable agencies-even in the organized antiestablishment forces. Many are the “doers” of the community. Some hold offices of statutory power; others merely aspire to such positions. As a reporter, you must know both the person in charge and the person who would like to be. You also must know those on the fringes of power-the clerks, records-keepers, and political errand boys who make few decisions but are in positions to know what is happening.
Names of high-visibility sources can be found in directories of public officials or lists of corporation officer’s labor union executives, and service organization directors. Here is where you find the news makers-the legislators, judges, executives, and others who routinely and publicly make decisions that affect your public- and often those who keep the records of newsmakers decisions. In any community, you can easily identify most of these sources by studying the newspaper for a week or two. But when you have done this, you know little more than average readers do, and you are in no position to give them any more news than they already have been getting.
Less Visible Sources: Digging beneath the surface, you will find that some of the best-informed and most powerful members of the community hold on major public office and therefore appear in no official directories. Even their names may seldom appear in the news. Some of these specialists: medical scientists, architects and engineers, law professors, or scholars in little-publicized fields. Others are persuader’s salespeople, clergy, and opinion leaders in various social and professional organizations. Still others are the true kingmakers’ community: bankers, major property owners, political bosses, syndicate leaders. All are persons of influence, whether it is exercised by words, money, patronage, or the threat of violence.
Some persons loudly proclaim themselves as “influential’s” by habitually writing letters to the editor, voicing their opinion meetings, and regularly running for office. And they may in indeed gain influential status if their names appear often enough in print. Normally, however, such self-advertising must be viewed with skepticism. The truly powerful (for example, slumlords and racketeers) tend to shun publicity. They can be identified, however, if you listen carefully, ask questions, and dig through enough public records. You need only observe the frequency with which certain names are mentioned in certain contexts. Not all of these backroom powers can be converted into news sources, but occasionally you may score an unexpected success. Mafia families once were considered virtually inaccessible; all that ended with Gay Talese’s Honor Thy Father.
The Go-Betweens: Many reporters view public relations practitioners as nuisances bent on grabbing space for trivia or keeping embarrassing stories out of print. Most PR practitioners, however, know their business too well to stoop to such practices. They offer only what they believe to be news, and they never try to kill a story. The most they ask when their client or employer is in trouble is time enough to prepare a defense. Nor will ethical PR practitioners lie to you or mislead you. Without credibility, they are out of business. They are therefore some of your best sources-as long as you recognize their bias and the danger of coming to depend upon them. Remember that PR practitioners are working for their employers; not the general public. They will be on your side when the employer’s interests coincide with the publics, but they will be of no help when the boss’s best strategy is silence. If PR people are wise, they will avoid the politician’s “no comment”; they will say only that they can’t talk about the subject at the moment.
One of the commoner public relations ploys is the staged event: the anniversary celebration, groundbreaking ceremony, check presentation, open house, president’s speech, or press conference. All of these are what historian Daniel Boors tin (The Image) calls pseudo events; they are planned primarily to gain favorable publicity. Your approach to these events will be dictated by your organization’s policy and your boss’s instructions. Usually you will give them no more space than they merit as legitimate news.
The biggest danger in dealing with PR practitioners is the subtle matter of seduction. Most PR people probably were once reporters themselves. They know what you want, and they give it to you. And you are tempted to do favors for them in return. Up to a point, reciprocation may be justified. You have crossed the line, however, when you begin to serve the PR person’s interests instead of the publics.
Perhaps the most frustrating go-betweens are those who serve government agencies, especially the armed forces. They often conceal information or supply misleading “leaks” -practices considered both unethical and self-defeating in corporate or institutional public relations. Government information officers have gone so far as to justify outright lies in the name of national security. In one respect, however, government go- betweens are less dangerous than more subtle practitioners; their misbehaviors have been so widely publicized that even the beginner seldom is seduced. An interesting book in this area is all the President’s Men ‘by the two reporters on the Wash in who helped expose the Watergate scandal
Sources Closer to Home: As a beginning professional, you may easily overlook potentially productive sources simply because they are not “official.” include the people closest to you-relatives, friends, people you have known for years, and people you meet every day. Here are potential sources for offbeat stories:
Your own experience and acquaintances-are you a Sunday painter, an amateur musician, a radio ham, a gun collector, or, watcher? If so, you probably come into contact with a hobby 1 that is doing something newsworthy. Or perhaps you had some usual job experience before you entered journalism. One reporter, a gold miner until he was 30, regularly uncovered stories among miners with whom he once worked. Another, who grew up in a Small town telephone exchange, frequently used his knowledge of electronics and the telephone industry. Many more have put their military experience and acquaintances to good use years later.
People you work with-printers, advertising salesmen, circulation, workers, and other newsmen. Circulation people regularly hear stories that seldom reach a reporter, and advertising salesmen often know more about business activities than the editor who is supposed to be covering them. Printers, who deal with circulation and advertising as well as news- editorial staffers, provide an additional listening post. In the newsroom itself, a casual chat with a fellow reporter may yield a scrap of information that completes a puzzle that has baffled you for weeks. Even a competitor may give you a clue to a story- sometimes inadvertently, sometimes because his employer’s policy prevents the reporter from using information, which he thinks, should be published. People who regularly hear a lot- salespeople, barbers, waitresses, hotel porters, receptionists, taxi drivers, and beauty operators much of what they hear is fragmented or distorted and a lot is unusable personal gossip. But some of it may lead to legitimate news stories. The first inkling of a price increase, an impending strike, a major business deal, a transportation delay, a vice operation, a mass food poisoning may come from sources who sometimes are referred to patronizingly as “the little people”. Their rumors must be checked carefully, but you can’t afford not to listen.
Routine Written Sources: Many standard fixtures that appear on the inside pages of newspapers are culled from reports and documents kept at the police station and the county courthouse. These include traffic accidents, complaints, arrests, fines, the filing of civil suits, and the daily lists of marriage licenses and divorces. The custodians of these records are the police dispatcher or booking sergeant, the sheriff or his chief deputy, highway patrol headquarters, the county clerk, and various court clerks.
Each day police reporters must read stacks of complaints and reports of investigations, only a few of which ever result in stories. Many are so similar that reporters can easily lose their place and discover later that they have been wasting time by reading something that was read and rejected the day before. One way to avoid this is to pay close attention to the date and hour of the report. If the complaints are numbered, reporters can keep their place by jotting down the number of the last one examined, then starting with the next number the next day. In small-town police departments where the complaints may not be numbered, reporters often leave their initials or some small identifying mark on each report read. Some such system is necessary, particularly when a substitute reporter must cover the beat.
Dates should be observed carefully when you are examining court records. Occasionally a lawyer checks out a file and keeps it for months. When it reappears, a clerk may place it among the recent dispositions. And if you aren’t alert, you may find that you have written a “news” story about a case that was disposed of two years ago. This can be embarrassing if you have reported the divorce of a couple long since remarried.
Both police and court records are notoriously inadequate in some respects. Ages and street addresses seldom appear in court records. Police reports may include these details, but they may omit marital status-and misspell all the names. Much of what you get from official documents must be verified by asking questions and consulting the city directory.
Getting Acquainted: One of a reporter’s more important assets is the ability to “talk shop” with almost anyone. This is because it offers a means of establishing rapport, a way of getting the source to talk. And it usually leads quickly to a newsworthy subject.
Because so many sources are part of the community power structure, the first step in learning to talk shop is to study government, economics, institutions, and procedural law. Learn all you can about each news making agency or information collection centre: its budget, the scope of its powers, and to whom it is responsible. Determine where it fits into the overall community structure, then get acquainted with its internal operations. Mere textbook information isn’t enough. You must understand the daily routine of each office, the documents that it collects and issues, and the enthusiasms and frustrations of tl1e people who work there. You must learn how your sources think ‘and feel, as well as what they do.
People and Power in Government: No matter what your beat or assignment, you will come into contact with government agencies at some point. If you are a sports writer, you may find $e federal courts settling a dispute between professional athletes and their employers, or the attorney general’s office investigating a fixed race. If you work for the home and family or “women’s” department, you may keep watch on the activities of the Consumer Protection Bureau, the Food and Drug Administration, and the Equal Opportunity Commission. As an education editor or police reporter, you will encounter government at every level- local, state, and national. No one textbook can describe all-you need to know about political structures, the court system, or principles of law. This can come only from detailed study and experience. You may speed up the learning process, however, if you approach each government source with the goal of analyzing his power-the nature of that power, its scope, and its source.
The first consideration is whether an, official makes law, interprets, or enforces it-whether he or she belongs to the legislative, judiciary, or executive branch. But this is only the starting point. It is equally important to determine the control this person’s office exercises over money, jobs, information, and other branches of government. Can it levy taxes and appropriate funds? If so, is there .a statutory limit on how much it can tax? If it has no taxing power, how large is its budget? What kinds of contracts may the head of the office negotiate? Does the official have full authority to determine who gets these contracts, or does law require acceptance of the lowest bid? How many people are employed in the office or department? Is the person in charge empowered to choose these people freely, or are there some restrictions? Can the official remove employees at will, or must, a hearing be conducted in order to discharge tenured personnel? What special information does the person collect or have access to? What other branches of government can be overruled by the office?
The scope of an official’s power may be limited in many ways. It may be a personal power, as is th6 case with executives and many judges, who are answerable only to the law. Or it may be a power shared with others, as in legislative bodies, regulatory commissions, and the Supreme Court. It may be a national, state, or merely local power. It lasts only as long as the term of office, which may be a specified number of years, a lifetime, or only as long as the person pleases some higher official.
The reporter must know who put the source in office, to whom he or she must answer, and how the official can be removed. Is it a constitutional office, one established by statute, or one created only b executive order? Is the source answerable directly to the voters, 0 only to the leaders of a political party? Who can fire this official when, and by what method?
Except for the few who are wealthy, the average person in government is in one respect like almost everyone else. The public official male or female-is concerned about his job: how much it pays, how long it will last, how he can gain recognition for good efforts and make them more effective, how he can use this current job as a springboard to something better. If you recognize these interests, you have a good start toward learning what makes the source tick. But to deal with this person effectively, you need to know still more. To what individual or pressure group does the official owe his present position? If he is an elected official, who supplied the money for the last campaign? And how are political debts being repaid? What are his ambitions, political philosophy, personal loyalties, and occupational prejudices?
If you can answer all these questions about the government source, you can explain many of his actions and evaluate the extent to which this person is influenced by public opinion. And you can get a fair idea of how well he will cooperate as a – news source. To illustrate, let’s examine some of the people you will meet.
