|
A journalist that wilfully breaks a legally binding confidentiality agreement, is actually a terrible sign for them. Media conglomerates will deeply worry about a journo leaking their dirty internal secrets if they morally disagree. Disney, Comcast, Fox, or Bezos don’t want them. Sources will worry about confidentiality. If a journo confirms something is off the record, it’s off the record. No buts. This is treated very seriously: it ruins the entire publication’s reputation and ability to talk to sources. If a naive journos tries, it’ll be killed by their editor, if not the editor-in-chief, probably under the veneer of legal and/or ethical grounds. Of course, a journo can talk to someone else who chooses to disclose whatever, be protected, etc, and that’s how it’s done. But the oldest adage in journalism is: “don’t be the story”. It’s probably one of the best professions, tbh, as paradoxical as it sounds. Remember that the journalism industry, as a whole, is not the idealised dream you think it is. |
In a lot of situations, the editor needs to know the source so they can evaluate their credibility and to ensure the journo just isn't making stuff up and attributing to anonymous source. At that point, there are many examples of the editor putting stuff into the copy that the journo did not included. Just because something is released under the journo's name does not mean the journo wrote it.