As you point out, granting anonymity to government officials makes it much easier for the officials to spread lies. Sadly, that equation works just as well the other direction. If a journalist claims an anonymous source, how do we know that the "journalist" isn't the one who is lying? It is much harder for other reporters to follow up on such claims.

PS: Congratulations on the award. It's great for you and Amy to get some well-deserved recognition for the hard work you do and the public service it provides.

"along with Democracy Now's Amy Goodman -- I've been named as the receipient of the first annual "Izzy Award for special achievement in independent media" by The Park Center for Independent Media at Ithaca College."

The honor is well deserved!

It's the dream of all tyrants, isn't it?

That's why anonymity (the soft liberal "progressive" euphemism for secrecy) is so en vogue, Glenn: because the modern nation-state government, whether the administration is Democrat or Republican, is a tyranny.

After all, you're the one who so faithfully documents here all the many and varied and ubiquitous evidences of exactly what, how, why, where, when, and who, this tyranny consists.

What is it that prevents you from making this basic recognition?

Is the real problem with progressives that you simply can't give up your fantasies, no matter how compelling the evidence?

Even when YOU are the one documenting it?

I learned this week that -- along with Democracy Now's Amy Goodman -- I've been named as the receipient of the first annual "Izzy Award for special achievement in independent media"

From who did you learn this? Inquiring minds want to know! Especially since you spend the entire first part of your post in obsequious prostration to the man, one wonders how, exactly, you came to (a) know about the award in advance, and (b) be considered for the award in the first place.

Do you see how failing to provide your source throws doubt on the whole award process? The whole validity of the thing? Are you really getting the award, or are you just trying to draw attention to yourself? C'mon, Mr Greenwald, name your source for this information.

Congratulations GG. Regardless of where your gig takes you, there is no doubt in my mind that you will always be true to the spirit of independent journalism/blogging. Richly deserved and I hope you all have a great time.

("journalism/blogging"--horrible term, but I don't know what else to call it.)

Glenn, it's much deserved.

I agree with your sentiments of Goodman. She is what I would colloquially refer to as a 'badass.' Plus she broadcasts out of an old firehouse. It doesn't get much better than that. I mean, compare the firehouse to the cable news sets, which get more absurd by the day -- lights and screens on the floors, holograms, etc. Wolf Blitzer should be ashamed of the E3-looking set he walks around when posing vapid questions to establishment career-climbers.

All real news journalism takes is a bricked enclosed space, some cameras, and generous public support.

That's what my daddy taught me or was it my 9th grade english teacher? I guess it's different than discerning fact from fiction but i'm sure that's what they meant.

congratulations - it's deserved....

I miss Colin Powell.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1JSBhI_0at0

Glenn you just got congrat-zapped.

Glenn you just got congrat-zapped.

What he wrote was satire, right? Obviously, I learned of the award from Ithica's Park Media Center a couple of weeks ago in order to be able to schedule a date for the ceremony, and then it was announced yesterday or the day before.

I kid, I kid!

For an administration flamboyantly vowing new levels of transparency, the Obama White House continuously relies upon one of the most un-transparent political weapons

Gee, Glenn, are you surprised that the Administration would be manipulating the media to catapult its own propaganda?!?1!

Sorry, man, I had to.

Congratulations on the Izzy. And let me convey my warmest Happy Birthday wishes, on behalf of the entire UT commentariat. I frickin' hate hearing about my own birthday, so apologies if it's unwelcome -- but I'm sure there are lots of people here who'd like to sing you a chorus of what is probably the worst song in the English language.

GG: If the claims from Klein and Brooks' sources are true about the intentions of the White House, then why can't they just attach their names to those claims and why aren't they made to do so by the journalists before having their statements amplified to the public?

What I don’t understand at this point is how ANY assertion by an anonymous source [beyond the understandable need to actually protect the source from reprisal] can be taken as ANYthing BUT misinformation. IMO, the use of “anonymous source” is a cue to NOT believe whatever the assertion is, until there is on the record information.

"High government officials" and the journalists who brown nose them are nothing but Cowards.

For a nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people."- John Fitzgerald Kennedy

The downside: It might be snowing in Ithaca. More likely, (cold)raining like a sumbitch. Whatever the weather, the place is, as they say "gorges".

Do yourself a favor. Head up the lake and check out Taughannock Falls (it's a short walk). Have a drink w/ Amy @ the Rongovian Embassy in Trumansburg, if it's still there. And the food was always good @ Moosewood back in the day.

Congratulations on being named recipient of the Izzy Stone award! You and Amy well deserve this, and more.

As to anonymous sources: When I was studying journalism, they weren't exactly a no-no, but you didn't use them as the basis for your entire story. They were like Deep Throat, pointing you to an angle you hadn't thought of or leading you to a primary source you might not have interviewed. A source that couldn't be verified was rarely used as more than support or to provide perspective.

The Bush administration relied on secrecy and lies. I'm hoping that the Obama administration will at least tell the truth, even if highly placed sources aren't on the record. So far, a few weeks into the new administration, they're headed in the right direction but haven't completely purged the nasty Bush habits. I wonder how much of that is reporters insisting, "If you tell me something juicy I won't use your name."