Insisting on using a gender pronoun when citing a source who wants to remain confidential can easily backfire. Main reason: It narrows the field of suspects when management tries to track down the anonymous source, and this is especially true when the informant is female.
Granted, many more women hold important roles in business, politics and government, but why make it easier to catch whistle-blowers?
Confidential sources are an important part of a journalist's network, and are protected by many state laws. Unfortunately, there is no federal law protecting journalists who refuse to reveal their sources. But that's another issue.
One way for reporters to cover the issue is to use the plural when citing information gathered confidentially. Another is to use gender-neutral terms like "a knowledgeable person said ... " and in second reference "that person said ..." Or the plural phrase, "several people noted ..." and this justifies the plural pronoun "they."
This way, the reporter is covered, the source remains unidentified, and there is no gender pronoun to narrow down the search by those looking to punish the source.
No comments:
Post a Comment