About a month before the debate that upended President Joe Biden's campaign, The Wall Street Journal published a story headlined "Behind Closed Doors, Biden Shows Signs of Slipping." The story was built largely on anonymous sources, with only Republicans providing the on-the-record ballast. Though the Journal's news pages have long had a reputation for studious nonpartisanship, it was roundly slammed by a cadre of media experts, who dismissed it as a hit piece filled with innuendo. The article has aged, obviously, far better than the critiques — which raises the question: Why weren't there more stories that prepared us for the shock of the debate? One theory, of course, is that many journalists didn't want to hurt Biden. I take a generous view here. The New York Times, for instance, did do many stories about the problem of Biden's age, despite the predictable savaging it got them from the Left. But there is a difference between covering Biden's age as a campaign issue and getting the straight story on his deterioration.
I think there is a more intricate underlying issue here of how reporting works today. The kind of reporting the Journal did, relying on deep and often anonymous sourcing, has become increasingly rare. Both editors and readers now expect hard evidence — documents, tapes, quotes from multiple named sources. Last week, the excellent reporter Olivia Nuzzi published a story in New York magazine detailing how Biden's decline was an open secret to insiders and to the reporters grimly following his public appearances. Commentators complained that the story could have been published earlier. My suspicion, however, is that before the debate any article like Nuzzi's would have been dismissed as "just vibes." Reporters once dealt freely in their own observations and the words of anonymous insiders. Now the rule is often that until there are documents or on-the-record quotes, there is no story. That has frequently made the news feel more professional and reliable. But it has also set the public up for shocking surprises.
This is the editor's letter in the current issue of The Week magazine.
The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
-
Normalising relations with the Taliban in AfghanistanThe Explainer The regime is coming in from the diplomatic cold, as countries lose hope of armed opposition and seek cooperation on counterterrorism, counter-narcotics and deportation of immigrants
-
Best poetry books of 2025The Week Recommends Magnificent collections from Luke Kennard, Leo Boix and Isabelle Baafi
-
‘Furious Minds: The Making of the MAGA New Right’ by Laura K. Field and ‘The Dream Factory: London’s First Playhouse and the Making of William Shakespeare’ by Daniel SwiftFeature An insider’s POV on the GOP and the untold story of Shakespeare’s first theater
-
‘Toxic chemicals emitted by those facilities can ravage the human body’Instant Opinion Opinion, comment and editorials of the day
-
Trump: Losing energy and supportFeature Polls show that only one of his major initiatives—securing the border—enjoys broad public support
-
Trump’s poll collapse: can he stop the slide?Talking Point President who promised to ease cost-of-living has found that US economic woes can’t be solved ‘via executive fiat’
-
The military: When is an order illegal?Feature Trump is making the military’s ‘most senior leaders complicit in his unlawful acts’
-
Ukraine and Rubio rewrite Russia’s peace planFeature The only explanation for this confusing series of events is that ‘rival factions’ within the White House fought over the peace plan ‘and made a mess of it’
-
‘The choice isn’t between domestic and foreign talent; the nation was built on both’Instant Opinion Opinion, comment and editorials of the day
-
The US-Saudi relationship: too big to fail?Talking Point With the Saudis investing $1 trillion into the US, and Trump granting them ‘major non-Nato ally’ status, for now the two countries need each other
-
Nigel Farage: was he a teenage racist?Talking Point Farage’s denials have been ‘slippery’, but should claims from Reform leader’s schooldays be on the news agenda?
