Credibility of sources for de-pegging story

Dear Editor,

I refer to an article in your newspaper "http://www.bt.com.bn/news-national/2010/08/04/de-pegging-brunei-beneficial".

The reporter had me hooked indeed to the grabbing headline.

As I read on, I couldn't help but notice that these views by the financial experts who were quoted were all "anonymous". Firstly, if I may ask, does the article reflects the "general financial experts" opinion (as stated in the article) OR the anonymous financial experts quoted in the article?

The impression I got from the article was that it was highly speculative. The anonymity of all the financial experts quoted lessens the credibility of the article.

Secondly, does the headline "De-Pegging of B$ beneficial" reflects the views of the government of His Majesty?

As a reader, I think, it would be fair to say that we expect articles that appear on the front page in The Brunei Times, a national paper, to quote some credible sources.

To read front page articles that have substance and not uncertainty.

Could you please answer my questions in the Opinion Page of your paper?

Thank you and looking forward to hear from you.

Joe on the iPhone

BT response

We appreciate readers' interest in the standards of journalism that The Brunei Times observes. Hence, we stress the following points:

1. It would be inaccurate for us to state that the story reflected the general opinion of finance experts on the question of de-pegging the Brunei dollar from the Singapore dollar. As the story shows though, most of the finance experts, interviewed for the story, expressed views favouring a de-pegging.

The main highlight of the report takes the majority view (as derived from the interviews conducted). Notice that the second half of the story captures a contrarian view which paints a less-than-optimistic scenario of a de-pegging.

All the sources spoke on condition of anonymity and we chose to publish their views based primarily on our assessment of their knowledge of the subject matter. We do recognise that some readers tend to find stories quoting unnamed sources to be lacking in credibility.

At the same time, we do respect the intelligence of our readers to decide how much to take from news reports, or whether or not to agree with experts. At the end of the day, we value the role of media to convey information and views on matters relevant to public discussion.

2. The story never claimed that His Majesty's Government has hinted at a possible de-pegging.

The story was about the views of experts on whether they thought a de-pegging of the Brunei dollar was a next-step to the creation of the Monetary Board of Brunei Darussalam, and whether a de-pegging would be beneficial to the economy and the local currency.

3. Unnamed sources quoted in stories that discuss relevant issues are carefully chosen based on their professional background and expertise.

It is unfortunate though that many professionals regarded as experts in their fields in our country often decide to speak to media unnamed. We hope that when we do use their quotes without their names, readers do not altogether brush off the reports as irrelevant and without substance.

We would like to assure our readers that The Brunei Times commits itself to contributing to public discussion on matters that relate to the future of our nation and the economy. Information and views of both experts and the common Bruneian on current affairs and the choices we anticipate to make are important in building our future, together.

The Brunei Times