Anonymous sources

Few reporters are immune from the use of anonymous sources, but they sorely test the reader's trust in the the process of fact gathering. They too easily can hide motives and bend the truth w/o accountability.

I have one source in Va/DC that has been a periodic correspondent, providing me information "for background only" (that's another discussion) on certain aspects of USDA. I must say the information he provides is valuable and has given me much insight into the FPB. This source is truly anonymous, as I have no idea who he/she is.

Lobbyists - most non-association lobbyists, that is - don't want their name in the paper or, for that matter, in blogs. For them, it is all about their clients.

But there is too much use of anonymous sources on matters of import and character. Free reign on anonymous submissions leads to suspicions that the reporter is "carrying water" for one interest or another. We should all try to avoid that fate.