The Huma Abedin story is the perfect story to look at journalism and the media.
When you read a story about Abedin, check to see how many people supposedly providing information and facts are actually named. Be suspicious of any story loaded with unnamed sources -- or even with one unnamed source. Nothing written about Weiner/Abedin is national security requiring anonymous sources. Absent names, you can assume the story is a platform for political payback and gossip.
If one has something to say about Abedin, that person should have the courage to step up and put his or her name on it.
Likewise, if you call yourself a journalist, demand information "on the record" -- don't let yourself be used by some unnamed source with an agenda. If you do, you are a gossip, not a journalist.
PS: Let me say it again, yes, of course there are instances when anonymous sources should be used. This just isn't one. Using anonymous sources irresponsibly is bad journalism not Woodward and Bernstein.
Cross-posted from GretaWire.
Start your workday the right way with the news that matters most. Learn more