Re: A Self-Serving Leak San Francisco Chronicle reporters Mark Fainaru-Wada and Lance Williams were investigating sports figures involved with steroids. A lawyer with clients in the BALCO investigation, an inquiry into the use of performance-enhancing substances by star athletes, used this as an opportunity to leak self-serving information. In confidence, Attorney Troy Ellerman showed the reporters transcripts of the grand jury testimony in hopes that the case would be dismissed on the grounds that grand jury information had been leaked. Fainaru-Wada and Williams continued to keep their promise of confidentiality when a judge ordered they spend time in jail. They refused to talk about the case even after Ellerman admitted to leaking …show more content…
If the reporters had revealed their informant, potential sources for future stories may not want to speak to them, consequently hurting the dissemination of information. This might cause problems, such as corruption, to go undetected and undermine journalism's task to serve as an independent monitor of power. Anonymity was certainly a powerful tool in the Watergate scandal that led to the resignation of President Richard Nixon. Faced with this situation, I would have told Ellerman a promise of anonymity may have to be renegotiated at a later date. Journalists can find themselves on a dangerous course - such as being in trouble with the law as in Fainaru-Wada and Williams case - if they agree to confidentiality too easily. However, if I had promised confidentiality to Ellerman without a predetermined set of conditions, I would have continued to protect him regardless of the consequences. The informant's identity isn't central to the story of sports figures using performance-enhancing drugs. Therefore, exposing the information isn't worth losing potential sources and making the process of reporting harder in the future. Besides, as the case study points out, other reporters could work on uncovering who leaked the