Unnamed Sources Policy

Why Named Sources Are Preferred

Named sources improve accountability and allow readers to assess expertise, access, motives and possible conflicts. Public attribution is generally stronger than an anonymous claim because the reader can better understand who is speaking and why that person may know the information.

Rare Use

Science Report rarely uses unnamed sources. Anonymity may be considered only when the information is important, credible, in the public interest and not reasonably obtainable on the record. Convenience, publicity or a preference to avoid accountability is not by itself a sufficient reason.

Required Conditions

• The source’s identity is known to editorial leadership rather than being accepted as an unknown online claim.
• The source has direct or otherwise credible knowledge of the information being provided.
• There is a credible risk of retaliation, danger or serious professional harm that explains the need for protection.
• The reason for anonymity is relevant to the source’s safety or ability to provide information, not merely convenience.
• Material claims are corroborated through documents, records or additional reliable sources where possible.
• Editorial leadership approves the anonymity arrangement and its description in the article.

When We Avoid Anonymous Claims

Unnamed sources should not be used primarily for personal attacks, unsupported allegations, promotional or competitor claims, speculation, reputation harm or medical, legal, financial and safety claims without reliable confirmation. Anonymity does not reduce the standard of evidence required for a serious statement.

Source Descriptions

When anonymity is granted, an article should describe why the source has relevant knowledge, why anonymity was granted and what limitations apply, without revealing identifying details. The description should be specific enough to establish relevance without exposing the protected identity.