The unknown reporter

I was listening to the radio yesterday and got entirely fed up with the inability of people in high level positions to say anything controversial or of meaning. Just for the record, I got over this frustration in about two seconds. It did give me an idea though...

I realize there are some serious pitfalls to having a reporter be anonymous, chief among those the level of accountability. But I could see this having a lot of value, too. Basically, it would work like this. News editors go to various politicians and VPs and general managers of teams, etc. and say, "If you ever have anything you'd like to get off your chest, call this number. The reporter has been selected by me and will remain anonymous. You can always deny whatever you say." So only two people on the planet know who this high-level person is talking to. The editor, and the mysterious reporter.

The reason I think we need this is that it takes away a level of accountability from everyone, and puts it on the paper as a brand. So it's risky. But over time you'd either grow to trust the insider information or not, but it would be the paper that would suffer. So it's in their best interest to verify the stories. And both reporter and information giver can speak without fear of reprisal. Nothing can really come back on them.

Anyway, not sure if that made any sense. But it made sense to me yesterday. So you really just need to get inside my head 16 hours ago and then you'll get it. Promise.