This happens daily, it is what the NYT calls a "government official speaking on the condition of anonymity". Try Google, you get multiple matching articles every single day.
It is gotten so ridiculous that the "public editor" of the NYT felt the need to whitewash the practice in one of her columns:
Of course, it highlights the virtues of the "investigative journalist", having to disguise the identity of his vital sources.
That, by and large, remains a fantasy. The most important tool for a journalist is his phone, and he uses it daily to call all the same "sources". These sources then relay some juicy factoids (fully adherent to the party line), which is repeated without being questioned and with anonymity granted, to a government official speaking on a government telephone line. The whole setup is so bizarre; of course no one gives out actual leaks on a freaking telephone line. It is no longer 1950.
It is gotten so ridiculous that the "public editor" of the NYT felt the need to whitewash the practice in one of her columns:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/13/opinion/sunday/the-public-...
Of course, it highlights the virtues of the "investigative journalist", having to disguise the identity of his vital sources.
That, by and large, remains a fantasy. The most important tool for a journalist is his phone, and he uses it daily to call all the same "sources". These sources then relay some juicy factoids (fully adherent to the party line), which is repeated without being questioned and with anonymity granted, to a government official speaking on a government telephone line. The whole setup is so bizarre; of course no one gives out actual leaks on a freaking telephone line. It is no longer 1950.