Article Contributed on: 6/8/2009 4:33:33 PM
In Sunday's DENVER POST, I read over twenty separate articles (I quit counting at 20!) that contained a reference saying that someone was 1) "not authorized to comment"; 2) "spoke on condition of anonymity"; 3) "requested that their identity not be disclosed"; or "was an unidentified source". The stories ranged from sports (Bronco's on Brandon Marshall) to international politics (US view of North Korea; Iran; Israeli settlements; Pakistan) to news (Air France disaster) to the economy (Federal Government's role in GM, banking, housing and AIG bail outs) to show biz (Carradine's death).
What the heck? Who IS authorized to speak? Who cares what an "unauthorized spokesperson" says, anyway? I want someone to step up and take responsibility and quote their boss or CEO or president. If they weren't authorized to comment, they probably didn't know what they were talking about anyway. Is everyone so afraid of their position that they can't say that President Obama or Air France or Pat Bowlen or Prime Minister Brown authorized them to say something...anything? What's the big deal?