News doesn’t just break anymore; it gets forwarded on WhatsApp, dropped in DMs, turned into Instagram Reels, and explained by influencers and finfluencers on LinkedIn and X. Images circulate faster than clarifications. Leaks go viral before reporters have the chance to verify anything. And somehow, everyone’s a journalist until accountability knocks on the door.

We’ve lived in this chaos for sometime and lamented the state of affairs. But there’s a time for lament, and there’s a time for action. We are going for action. In this story and the pieces that follow, we will explore the fundamentals of journalism, the trends, highlights, shifts, biases and a lot more. Allow me to welcome you to On the Record.

And in that context, let’s jump straight into discussing one of the most misunderstood phrases in journalism. This is when talking to a journalist, the person says, “Keep me off the record.” Another version is, “I want to be off the record.” Sure, but what does this person exactly mean? A common misunderstanding is that during a conversation with a reporter, simply saying “off the record” after making a statement makes it confidential or it is just a polite way of saying “don’t quote me”. However, none of these things define “off the record”.

Let’s refer to the standard definition, as outlined by The Associated Press, a benchmark for many newsrooms globally.

On the record: “The information can be used with no caveats, quoting the source by name.” (Consider this as the default mode for journalists.)

Off the record: “The information cannot be used for publication.”

(Not the quote, not the paraphrase, not even the information for background unless agreed otherwise. And crucially, this must be agreed on before anything is shared.)

On background: “The information can be published but only under conditions negotiated with the source. Generally, the sources do not want their names published but will agree to a description of their position.” (For example, a senior government official familiar with the matter said so.)

To be clear, anything not clearly agreed upon beforehand is considered on the record.

“Not many newsrooms have a policy on all this,” says Devadas Rajaram, professor at Alliance University, Bengaluru. “It is a race against time in digital journalism. Journalists, particularly younger ones and those in broadcast journalism, may jump to conclusions based on tips shared on digital platforms like WhatsApp, Telegram and Signal, without verifying or investigating further.”

He adds: “Many websites also have anonymous digital dropboxes that invite tips and information on plausible scandals. Panama Papers is an example. In such cases, you don’t know who is giving you the information, and how this off-the-record information should be handled.”

One of the most infamous scandals in journalism is the one involving Jayson Blair at The New York Times in 2003. Blair was found to have committed widespread fabrication and plagiarism across dozens of high-profile stories. According to The New York Times, he not only lifted quotes from other stories but also invented and misrepresented conversations.

This scandal wasn’t just about plagiarism. It was also about how journalistic integrity rests on what we report and also on how it is obtained. While Blair’s misconduct wasn’t specifically about “off the record” violations, it highlighted how damaging poor attribution and dishonest source handling can be for not just one reporter but for an entire organization.

So, do Indian media professionals interpret “off the record” differently from their global peers?

To this, Rajaram says, “There is no such thing as an Indian newsroom. Different newsrooms have different policies and training practices. This is a newsroom-specific issue and these practices can vary in India and in the West as well.”

What is important, he continues, “is that students, before they become journalists, should be trained about principles such as ‘off the record’. Unfortunately, this is not followed very well”.

To understand how these principles play out in day-to-day reporting, I turned to Pradip K. Saha, journalist and co-founder at The Morning Context.

“Traditionally, establishing whether a conversation was on or off the record typically involved a more structured process. This included calling a person, arranging an appointment, meeting them, setting the context for the story and so on. But now most things are verbal or via DMs and messages, and they have blurred the lines of formality and informality,” says Saha.

On being asked if there had ever been an incident where “off the record” shaped a story and yet went south, Saha says, “Unfortunately, yes. But I think this happens to every journalist once in a while. Some years back, I was working on a story about a company. I took the utmost care of publishing a piece of information that had been passed on to me as publishable and attributable to an anonymous source. But once the story was out, the original source was somehow identified and let go. And I lost a valuable source. It was unfortunate but this is why it is extremely important to clarify ‘on the record’ right before the conversation begins.”

He adds: “People say a lot of things in the heat of the moment. It is your responsibility as a journalist how and what you do with the information.”

It’s worth noting here that “off the record” is often misused as a rewind button, invoked after something has been said, as if it can magically erase the statement.

In such a case, says Saha, “it is up to the journalist and the publication to decide what to do. There is no easy way out there. That’s why it is important to establish the ground rules in the beginning.”

So, what should journalists keep in mind to navigate these murky waters effectively?

Start every conversation with clarity. If the interview is on the record, say so. If there’s ambiguity, resolve it before any information is exchanged.
Don’t accept retroactive changes. Once something has been said on the record, a source can’t simply walk it back with a casual “that was off the record”.
Spell things out in digital contexts. Just because WhatsApp is encrypted, it doesn’t mean the conversation is strictly private. Make it clear what can and can’t be quoted.
Educate as you go. Many sources, especially in new or informal settings, don’t understand how journalistic attribution works. Take a minute to explain and do so beforehand.

To sum up, when in doubt, choose clarity over convenience. “Off the record” is not a magic phrase. It is a trust-based agreement that holds power, but only when both parties know what it exactly means, its effect and consequences. In digital journalism, that clarity has never mattered more.

Cover image from Unsplash.

The Morning Context will be part of ICFJ’s first Elevate cohort

Why read this story?

Top Stories