Without question. If you can’t talk to your editor about information you were told off the record, how would they be able to help guide you moving forward? Or, if you were attempting to write a story citing several sources who spoke with you off the record, how would your editor be able to judge whether those sources are credible enough to actually use?
As an example, when I’m trying to figure out how the buyer is in a big real estate deal, most of my industry sources will not speak off the record. If I just told my editor five sources told me XYZ, their first question is who were those sources, because for all they know those five sources could be low level associate brokers who just don’t have the know-how or reputation that would make my editors comfortable with trusting them. But, if four of them were still not the most reputable sources but what they told me matches up with the fifth person who is directly involved in the deal, my editors would likely give me the green light.
100% and you should consult with them as needed.
There are plenty of times when I’ve been in a room with 20+ people and some one has announced, “It’s blahblahblah - but it’s off the record.” All your colleagues should be bound under the same ethical standards.
Edit- and ideally all your colleagues and editors should be on the same page about a story-
In most circumstances, “off the record” means that information won’t be directly and publicly quoted and attributed to them. After that, there are nuances on if you would be reporting the gist of what was said, how it’s attributed, if it’s made public at all or if it’s for your own understanding, etc. But yeah your news team should know.
Without question. If you can’t talk to your editor about information you were told off the record, how would they be able to help guide you moving forward? Or, if you were attempting to write a story citing several sources who spoke with you off the record, how would your editor be able to judge whether those sources are credible enough to actually use?
As an example, when I’m trying to figure out how the buyer is in a big real estate deal, most of my industry sources will not speak off the record. If I just told my editor five sources told me XYZ, their first question is who were those sources, because for all they know those five sources could be low level associate brokers who just don’t have the know-how or reputation that would make my editors comfortable with trusting them. But, if four of them were still not the most reputable sources but what they told me matches up with the fifth person who is directly involved in the deal, my editors would likely give me the green light.
yes
100% and you should consult with them as needed. There are plenty of times when I’ve been in a room with 20+ people and some one has announced, “It’s blahblahblah - but it’s off the record.” All your colleagues should be bound under the same ethical standards.
Edit- and ideally all your colleagues and editors should be on the same page about a story-
Yes, absolutely.
There are times when the answer is no but this is definitely not one of them
In most circumstances, “off the record” means that information won’t be directly and publicly quoted and attributed to them. After that, there are nuances on if you would be reporting the gist of what was said, how it’s attributed, if it’s made public at all or if it’s for your own understanding, etc. But yeah your news team should know.
In most circumstances, off the record is off the record and you can’t do anything with it. Background is different.
Yes