Knowing what information you should and should not share with the media is critical to having productive conversations that result in a well-told story.
Therefore, a number of common misconceptions must be addressed:
Anonymity is never 100% guaranteed
Journalists can grant anonymity to a source who hopes to protect their identity when sharing information on the record. This shields the whistleblower from being named by the media outlet, both in the published story and in any legal hearings the media outlet may face as retaliation (see Anonymity).
But despite anonymity protections, journalists can be subpoenaed to reveal anonymous sources. TIME reporter Matthew Cooper was ordered to jail for refusing to reveal a source; at the last minute, he testified and disclosed the source’s identity to the court. The source’s name is still not available to the public, so it is impossible to know what happened to them, but Cooper claims the source released him from confidentiality upon learning that he faced jail time.
A whistleblower’s identity can also be revealed through other channels. For example, WorldCom whistleblower Cynthia Cooper intended to remain anonymous, but a member of Congress released her internal audit to the press. Under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), “any person” is entitled to have access to any “agency document” — which includes internal audits like Cooper’s — if they give a reasonable description of the document they want to see. This congressperson likely thought the audit was newsworthy and knew they were entitled to release it to the press.
A whistleblower should always be prepared for the possibility that their name could become public. For guidance on protecting your identity, see Digital Security.
Sources can communicate with journalists on their own terms
It is impossible to maintain total digital security, but there are steps you can take to protect yourself:
- Do not use employer-owned devices or employer or office wi-fi to communicate with journalists over messaging apps, e-mail, and so forth.
- Do not communicate with journalists during your work hours or on work networks or platforms.
- Remove metadata from screenshots and photos. The definition of metadata is “data that provides information about other data.” The metadata embedded in photos and screenshots is not visible in the context of ordinary use, but it can be used to trace the circumstances under which the image was made: date, time, location, identity of the photographer and those depicted, and the like. Information on metadata and how to remove it is available here.
- Silence e-mail and text notifications from journalists so they do not pop up when you are at work.
- Use end-to-end encrypted messaging. With standard SMS messaging, you are vulnerable to monitoring by your wireless carrier and the National Security Agency (NSA); hackers and criminals can also take advantage of it. Encryption software uses an algorithm to render messages indecipherable to anyone who does not have access to a special key that makes the messages readable. Using encrypted messaging can be as simple as using iMessage or WhatsApp instead of SMS messaging—just make sure to do your research before picking a medium.
Journalists cannot provide legal advice
Journalists are not trained or qualified to offer legal advice to a source. Therefore, before speaking with the media, whistleblowers should consider seeking the advice of an attorney to review employment contracts and ensure the reporting process is handled carefully. Attorneys can also help to identify which protections apply to a whistleblower’s case, and which whistleblower rewards may be available.
It is common — and encouraged — for attorneys to offer initial legal consultations for free.
The Government Accountability Project (GAP) warns that legal counsel may advise against speaking with the media, in order to avoid the disclosure or premature publication of information that could jeopardize a whistleblower’s legal case. However, if a whistleblower does speak with the media, GAP says this should not affect the quality of legal counsel available to that whistleblower.
A whistleblower’s disclosure is NOT a leak
Journalists should never refer to a whistleblower’s disclosure as a “leak.” The terms “leaking” and “whistleblowing” are often conflated, but they have very distinct meanings, according to GAP. Someone who qualifies as a whistleblower is subject to various protections (see Job and Financial Security).
