In cases like this where anonymity is likely necessary to divulge crucial information and survive? Absolutely. You sound like you have no idea how journalism in general and confidential sources in particular works.

Downvotes to an honest question

Honest question, my ass! It was obviously a rhetorical question meant to imply that anonymous sources are inherently not trustworthy.

[–] warmaster@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

Honest question, my ass! It was obviously a rhetorical question meant to imply that anonymous sources are inherently not trustworthy

This made me realize the message I was transmitting. I edited my post in hope I can better express my question. Sorry for writing like a moron.

[–] INHALE_VEGETABLES@aussie.zone -4 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Its not, but you know your comment reads like corporate shilling yeah?

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 6 points 4 months ago (1 children)

How? I'm literally arguing that anonymous whistleblowers aren't inherently untrustworthy. That's the OPPOSITE of what corporate shills keep saying!

[–] INHALE_VEGETABLES@aussie.zone 2 points 4 months ago

I replied to the wrong comment but if it helps my case at all, I'm self diagnosed as retarded.