Would the real 'anonymous' please stand up

Earlier this week, the media was abuzz with statements from a "senior political source" who said that "Hamas has already begun preparing for the next armed conflict. It has resumed smuggling weapons and explosives into the Gaza Strip, and it is doing everything it can to rehabilitate its tunnel infrastructure and resume rocket production."

News consumers probably had no idea who the unnamed individual behind the quote was, but those familiar with the political theater and its actors would have had no trouble pinpointing the source of information.

The prevalent use of terms like "defense official" or "senior political source" to describe a journalistic source stems first and foremost from said individuals' desire to disguise themselves. These individuals also believe that being quoted anonymously allows them to say things that, for some reason, they do not wish to have attributed to them.

Former Meretz MK Yossi Sarid once told me that he never used this cover.

"I find using it unacceptable because it illustrates public officials' fear of expressing their true opinions," he said. "As for me, when I speak, I speak for myself, and if there is something I don't want attributed to me, I simply refrain from saying it."

I find Sarid's logic perfectly acceptable, and our politicians would be wise to take his advice, as using the current system does the public a disservice.

If we revisit the statement about Hamas' actions in Gaza, concerned Israelis -- especially those living in the communities adjacent to the southern border -- must ask themselves whether or not this was a warning they should be taking seriously. Was this warning based on solid information or on a general assessment? And if this warning was true, why would a senior defense official dismiss it, saying, "There is no indication to that effect, and it is unclear what information led the political source to this conclusion, or where he got this information."

Moreover, using the term "political sources" allows politicians to shrug off responsibility for the consequences of their actions, because no one except the journalists who reported the information knows their identity, effectively allowing them to claim that they had said nothing.

My fellow journalists and political commentators can also take the initiative in this case, by informing an individual seeking to hide behind the privilege of anonymity that this is simply unacceptable. If politicians have a shred of integrity and responsibility they should own their quotes, or refrain from being quoted.

I fear some of my colleagues would find this mission difficult, as it may cost them interesting news items, but I have no doubt that such a demand by journalists would make it difficult for politicians to speak out of both sides of their mouths, once as an "unnamed political source" and once on the record.

טעינו? נתקן! אם מצאתם טעות בכתבה, נשמח שתשתפו אותנו