What if someone is being interviewed, and they ask for their name not to be used...?

Question

Does the journalist have any legal obligation to follow their wishes?

Answer 1

i'd like to think so.

Answer 2

There's no legal obligation. There is an ethical obligation if there is an agreement before the interview that the name not be used. And usually if the person asks that their name not be used after the interview, the journalist will comply.

But that often means that the interview as a whole cannot be used unless the journalist can find someone else who will corroborate the unnamed source's story on the record. It's a case-by-case situation, but in all but the most unusual circumstances, reporters should not be using unnamed sources. It detracts from the credibility of the story.

Answer 3

If the person being interviewed is a source, the reporter is obligated not to reveal that source unless ordered to do so by a court. Some people will not speak to reporters if it's a sensitive situation (think Scooter Libby/Valerie Plame story from 2 years ago. One reporter spent nearly three months in jail because they would not reveal their source).

If it's a sensitive situation, or a privacy issue, or if someone could be harmed if the person being interviewed was named, then the reporter may write in his/her story "an unnamed source" or "spoke to the press only under the condition of anonymity".

Answer 4

I would guess so but, an anonymous letter and the same with an interview is not substantiated with this type of signature. I for one think a person should stand up for what they believe in or hold your tongue.
If you cannot give your name then be quiet. Don't be sneaky.