Attribution in News Writing

You will find in politics that you are much exposed to the attribution of false motive. Never complain and never explain. Stanley Baldwin 1867-1947 (Earl Baldwin of Bewdley)

I don't want to be quoted, and don't quote me that I don't want to be quoted. Winston Burdett 1913-1993

Attribution is the "who says so?" in news stories. It is the source of information. Attribution adds credibility to your reports and gives authority to your stories.

Where to use Attribution

There is no easy answer as to when and how often you give attribution in your stories. You report attribution in print and broadcast news just as you do in normal speech.

Stop and think how you tell a story to a friend. You may say something similar to: "Then Jimmy said we ought to go to the movies. But Gayle said she didn't like the idea. Finally Scott said we should all just go out and have a frozen yogurt. So that's what we did."

In our little script, the "who said so" is at the beginning, before what was said. That is the way attribution is reported in broadcast news--at the beginning--NOT at the end of the sentence as you see in newspapers. Newspapers place attribution AFTER what was said because what was said is seen as more interesting than who said it.

Think of it this way for a moment. The placement of attribution at the end of the sentence is fine for print, where your eyes have a chance to review the facts in the sentence after you are informed of the attribution. The broadcast audience does not have the luxury of reviewing your new story from the electronic media.

Placing the attribution first in broadcast news stories makes a direct sentence and allows the audience a chance to judge source credibility as the facts are heard, rather than waiting for a delayed attribution. In newspaper stories, attribution should be placed after the text needing attribution. In broadcast stories, attribution goes first.

When to use Attribution

We have already answered one of the important question surrounding attribution, WHERE SHOULD IT BE PLACED? Attribution goes after the text in print stories and it goes first in broadcast scripts.

The second question is WHEN SHOULD ATTRIBUTION BE USED? This question is not as easy to answer since it involves personal judgement. Here are some suggestions to help you determine when attribution is appropriate.

The easiest rule to remember when deciding if attribution is necessary is crime. Crime reports always require attribution. Attribution demonstrates that you are relying on official sources for information in your story. It is irresponsible not to use attribution when describing a crime to which a person's name is linked.

You should also include attribution if the story:

• implies blame
• is controversial
• had doubtful validity
• might be disputed
• might be questionable
• when opinions are offered
• direct and indirect quotations

You do not have to use attribution if the facts in the story are indisputable or few would question them. For example, you would not attribute something like:

THE HURRICANE PASSED OVER TROY THURSDAY AFTERNOON.

The hurricane that struck Troy Thursday afternoon was the worst storm of the century.

REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE FOR MAYOR JOAN JOHNSON PULLED AN UPSET IN THE ELECTION RESULTS.

If Johnson won an election that few expected her to win, the fact is indisputable. Few would question it.

Often things are not so black and white--so either/or--and that is where you will probably start wondering about whether or not you should include attribution. You will just have to use your own judgement in most cases.

Keep in mind that attribution increases your story's credibility and makes the story stronger. By naming your sources of information, you enable your readers, viewers or listeners to judge the value of your facts. The audience knows a foreign policy statement that originates at the White House has more credibility than a foreign policy statement from an officer on Troy University's police force. Attribution allows the readers or audience decide about credibility. If you have doubts about the quality of the information in your story, attribution can be used to alert the audience to this potential problem. Anonymous telephone information inserted in a story should be identified as such. (Plus, you have to question "why" someone is willing to call you with a story, but is too scared to leave his or her name. This is usually a case of someone wanting you--the reporter--to grind an ax for him or her.) Exclusive stories from other media should credit those organizations, unless you can cross- check the information.

Broadcast news writers can often get away with a short-hand style attribution. Because time is the limiting factor in broadcast news, it is often necessary to condense the source of your information or to eliminate it altogether. In broadcast news, you quite often shorten long government titles to "officials" or "authorities," especially when that information is of routine value or little importance. Print reporters should be more specific when using attribution.

You might exclude the reference altogether, as in the case of sources that mean little to the outcome of the story. If the consumer price index goes up or down, there is little question where the information comes from, so why bother with the attribution?

Levels of Attribution

There are generally four types of attribution recognized by journalists. The best description of these four types first drafted by Bill Moyers, then press secretary to President Lyndon Johnson. These points were later refined and distributed in the guidelines for White House reporters by J.F. terHorst (spelling is correct on this name), President Gerald Ford's Press Secretary.

1. On the record. All statements are directly quotable and attributable by name and title to the person who is making the statement.

2. On background. All statements are directly quotable, but they cannot be attributed by name or specific title to the person commenting. The type of attribution to be used should be spelled out in advance "A White House official" . . . "an Administration spokesperson."

3. On deep background. Anything that is said in the interview is usable but not in direct quotation and not for attribution. The reporter writes it on his or her own.

4. Off the record. Information given "off the record" is for the reporter's knowledge only and is not to be aired or made public in any way. The information also is not to be taken to another source in hopes of getting official confirmation.

5. Guidance. Information given as guidance is to help reporters with the status or timing of an event. The information is considered to be similar to "on background" statements. An example of a guidance request would be reporters asking about when the President will send the name of a Supreme Court Associate Justice nominee to the Senate for confirmation. The President's press secretary could give reporters "guidance" information instead of answering the same question hundreds of times a day to individual reporters.

When the source of information for a story says nothing about being quoted, the reporter can presume that the information is on the record. After all, the subject is talking to a reporter about a developing news story. Sometimes, a source asks to go off the record, and it is up to the reporter to decide whether to accept the information on this basis. (Some reporters will tell the news maker that as a reporter, any information could find its way into a story. Because of that, I will not listen to anything told me "off the record.") Once the reporter allows the person being interviewed to go "off the record," he or she may not use the material.

Some reporters refuse to accept material with the condition that it may not be used in any form. They may bargain with the source, asking if they can go to another source to obtain confirmation. Or they may ask if the material can be used without using the source's name.

A source may ask to go on background, usually so that the source can provide the reporter with information that will clarify an event or situation. The source cannot be named but may be described as a "city hall official," "a state legislator," or some other general term. To some sources, background means no direct quotes; others permit direct quotes. The reporter must be clear about the terms of the agreement with the source. You need to be aware that different stations may have varying policies towards attribution. Many editors and news directors refuse to accept copy that contains charges or accusations with no named source. They will not accept attribution to "an official in city hall" or a "company spokesperson." You need to be aware of the policy of each newspaper or station you work for.

Some Problems with Attribution

The reporter who accepts material with the promise of anonymity for the source or absolute off-the-record status for the information must realize that he or she is trading the public's need to know for his or her access to information. It is a calculated risk.

Background and off-the-record information pose problems for the conscientious reporter because he or she knows that backgrounders can be used to float "trial balloons." These are stories that are designed by the source to test public reaction without subjecting the source to responsibility for the statement. Reporters, eager to obtain news of importance and sometimes motivated by the desire for exclusives, may become the conduits for misleading or self-serving information.

Remember, and this is important, attributing material to a source does not prove its truth. All a reporter does when attributing information is to place responsibility for it with the source named in the story. Attribution says only: It is true that the source said this.