JOE McGINNISS

The Globe yesterday broke the inside story of the Red Sox’ epic September collapse.

High up in the piece is this explanation:

“This article is based on a series of interviews the Globe conducted with individuals familiar with the Sox operation at all levels. Most requested anonymity out of concern for their jobs or potential damage to their relationships in the organization.”

So it’s okay for the Globe to base a Red Sox expose’ on anonymous sources, but somehow scandalous when I do the same in THE ROGUE?

The Anonymous Source tracker at The Ink-Stained Wretch keeps daily track of use of anonymous sources by major news organizations dating back to Feb. 10, 2010.

The following 24 news outlets have each used anonymous sources 500 times since then, with the New York Times and Washington Post racking up more than two thousand citations and the Wall Street Journal leading the MSM pack with 7,218.

Yet it was somehow wrong for me to use some unnamed sources, as well as more than sixty named sources, in THE ROGUE?

Hmmm, is that hypocrisy I smell?

Wall Street Journal 7,218
Reuters 5,814
BusinessWeek 4,899
Bloomberg 4,877
New York Times 2,539
Washington Post 2,187
The Associated Press 1,942
Los Angeles Times 1,284
New York Daily News 1,035
AFP 1,004
New York Post 987
San Francisco Chronicle 970
Livemint 954
Economic Times 935
Financial Times 909
Times of India 889
ESPN 810
Reuters Africa 776
Hindustan Times 775
New York Times (blog) 746
Boston Globe 655
Patch.com 585
The Star-Ledger – NJ.com 523
CNN International 500