Attribution in Journalism: Said, According To and Anonymous Sources

Jonah filed his first story for the local paper at 11 p.m.: a school closure, three sources, 400 words. His editor sent it back with eleven red marks. Not one was about grammar. "Sources say." "Claimed." "Experts believe." "Parents are furious." Each mark asked the same question: says who? (Jonah is a made-up example.)

If you've had a story come back like that, you already know attribution matters. The tricky part is the craft: which facts need a source, which verb to use, where it goes, and how to write about a source you've agreed not to name.

This guide explains attribution in journalism using the rules the Associated Press and NPR publish for their own reporters: verbs, placement, documents, anonymous sources, and one short story edited with eight fixes. You also get a decision table and a source log to copy.

Attribution is only as good as your proof. ParrotNotes records interviews on your phone and gives you a searchable transcript, so you can check who said what before it runs.

What is attribution in journalism?

Attribution in journalism means telling the reader where each quote and fact in a story came from. That could be a person you interviewed, a document, a statement, a dataset or another news outlet. NPR Training defines it as "revealing where you got the facts in your story" in its guide If you want people to trust your reporting, attribute your sources.

The importance of attribution in journalism comes down to trust. Readers can't judge a claim without knowing who made it. The SPJ Code of Ethics, revised in October 2026, puts it in four words: "Never plagiarize. Always attribute." It also says "the public is entitled to as much detail as possible to judge the reliability and motives of sources."

Attribution also protects you. When a source says "I never said that," the attributed line, your notes and your recording are your answer.

What needs attribution in journalism, and what doesn't

Not every sentence needs a source. NPR's example: the US-Mexico border is 1,952 miles long. That's settled, so it can stand alone. This year's immigration figures are new information, so they need a source.

The AP's News Values and Principles set the test in one line: "Anything in the AP news report that could reasonably be disputed should be attributed."

NPR lists the categories that generally need attribution:

• Quotes
• New facts
• Accusations and allegations
• Disputed or controversial information
• Anything that's not common knowledge
• Anything sweeping in nature

Two things usually don't need a source. The first is common knowledge (the capital of France, the date of an election). The second is what you saw yourself: if you were at the meeting and counted 40 people, you can write that 40 people attended. Say you were there when it helps the reader trust the detail.

How to write attribution: said, according to and other verbs

Most attribution is a source plus a verb ("said") or a phrase ("according to"). Small word choices change what the reader hears.

Why "said" is the default

NPR calls "says" or "said" "especially useful because it's non-judgmental. It merely connects the fact or quote to the source." That neutrality is the point. The reader decides what to think of the speaker, not you.

Print and online news stories mostly use the past tense, "said." Features and broadcast scripts often use "says," which sounds more natural read aloud. Pick one and keep it for the whole story.

When "according to" fits

"According to" works best for documents, data and organisations: "according to the district's enrollment report," "according to court records," "according to the National Weather Service."

For a person you interviewed, "said" is usually cleaner. "According to Okafor" can read as if you're holding the statement at arm's length, which is a signal you may not mean to send.

Verbs that add a judgment

Every verb other than "said" carries a meaning. NPR's guide sorts them:

NPR's warning on "claim" is blunt: use it "only when you are downright suspicious." It also advises against amorphous groups like "experts" or "analysts," which suggest a consensus you didn't measure. Name the people, or narrow the group: "economists who've studied universal basic income."

Where the attribution goes

• After the fact, in most online and print copy. NPR notes that in digital stories "the attribution usually goes after the fact because the fact is more important." In audio, it often comes first, because listeners need to know who is talking.
• Name before the verb: "Okafor said." Flip it ("said Maria Okafor, president of the school board") when a long title follows, so the verb doesn't get stranded.
• Long quotes: attribute after the first sentence, not at the end of a paragraph-long quote. The reader shouldn't wait three sentences to find out who's talking.
• One attribution per paragraph of continuing quotes is enough. Paraphrase is different: every new paragraph of paraphrased claims needs its own source, or it reads as your own statement.
• Full name and title on first reference, surname after that.

For the separate job of trimming and checking the words inside the quotation marks, see our guide on how to quote an interview.

Attributing documents, statements and other outlets

Interviews are only one kind of source. AP's rules cover the rest:

• Written statements and emails. When a quote comes from "a report, email or news release," AP says reporters "should say so." Write "said in a statement" or "said in an email," not just "said." A written reply has been drafted, often by a press office, and readers deserve to know.
• The setting. AP adds that stories should, when relevant, give "the setting in which a quotation was obtained – for example, a press conference, phone interview or hallway conversation."
• News releases. AP never publishes releases as they are; it uses their information with the release material "duly credited."
• Online material. It "must be vetted according to our standards of accuracy and attributed to the original source." Trace a viral claim back to whoever first made it, then attribute to them.
• Other outlets' scoops. When another outlet got there first through real reporting, AP says "we should mention that the other outlet first reported it." NPR adds: "We avoid writing 'reportedly'" and give the outlet explicit credit instead.

AI tools belong here too. The SPJ code asks journalists to "Clearly identify the sources and technology that shape the creation of news." A machine transcript or an AI summary is a tool, not a source. Check every quote against the audio and attribute facts to whoever said them, never to the software.

Anonymous sources: how to attribute what you can't name

Whether a source can be named is agreed before the interview. The levels (on the record, background, deep background, off the record) and how to negotiate them are covered in our guide to the off the record meaning. This section covers only what happens on the page once you've agreed not to name someone.

AP's rules for the published copy:

• Never just "a source." AP says "simply quoting 'a source' is not allowed." The description has to establish credibility: AP's examples are "according to top White House aides" or "a senior official in the British Foreign Office."
• Say why. "We must explain in the story why the source requested anonymity." The usual form: "who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the plan."
• Don't hide the obvious. AP says not to attribute to anonymous sources information that is "obvious or well known." State it as fact.
• Don't double-count. AP says not to report that a person "declined comment" when that same person is already quoted anonymously.
• Credit the original outlet. If you use another outlet's anonymous material, AP says it "must be attributed to the originating news organization" with that outlet's description of the source.

The SPJ code sets the bar for agreeing in the first place: anonymity is "a last resort for sources with information of substantial public interest who may face danger, retribution or other harm." And it asks you to "Explain decisions to audiences." Our walk-through of the journalism code of ethics covers the rest of the code.

Attribution in journalism examples: one story, eight fixes

Here's a short story with the problems Jonah's editor marked. The town, the people and the numbers are invented for this example.

Before:

(1) The Riverton school board will close Lincoln Elementary next fall, sources say. (2) Enrollment at the school has dropped 40% since 2019. (3) Board president Maria Okafor claimed the closure would save $1.2 million a year.

(4) "We don't have a choice," admitted Okafor. "The building needs a new roof, and the state won't help. We looked at every option."

(5) Experts say small schools cost more per student. (6) Parents are furious. (7) The plan was reportedly first discussed in March. (8) "This is the best option for our students," the district said.

The fixes:

The edited story is barely longer, and every claim now points to a person, a document or something the reporter saw.

Before you file, run the story past a fact-checking pass that lists each attributed claim next to its proof. If you're new to the structure itself, our guide on how to write a news story covers the lead and the order of information.

The attribution decision table

Use this while editing, as a quick reference for attribution in journalism. Find the kind of material, then the form.

Keep proof of every attribution

Attribution is a promise that the words and facts trace back to a source. Keep the trail with a short log per story:

SOURCE LOG
Story:            [working title]
Claim or quote:   [exact words, or the fact in one line]
Source:           [full name, title, organisation / document name]
How obtained:     [in person / phone / video / email / statement / document / post]
Setting and date: [where, Month DD, YYYY, time]
Ground rules:     [on the record / other terms agreed, with time]
Proof:            [recording file + timestamp / link / screenshot]
Published as:     [the exact attribution words used in the story]

Kemi, a student reporter (also a made-up example), quoted a city councillor saying the budget "won't touch the libraries." A week later, the councillor's office said she'd been misquoted. Kemi opened her recording, found the timestamp in her log, and sent the 20-second clip to her editor. No correction ran.

That's where a recorder earns its place. ParrotNotes records the interview on your phone and turns it into a transcript you can search by keyword, so the line you need is seconds away.

As of November 2026, the Free plan includes 100 minutes a month, up to 30 minutes per recording. Transcripts are kept, but audio is deleted after 30 days on Free, so export the clips you may need. Pro (US$19.99 a month, or US$14.99 a month billed annually) records up to 3 hours at a time and keeps audio without a limit.

Download ParrotNotes before your next interview and keep the proof behind every "said."

Attribute it, then prove it

Good attribution in journalism is a handful of habits. Attribute anything a reader could dispute. News values decide whether something is a story; attribution decides whether readers believe it.

Use "said" for people and "according to" for documents. Name the statement, email or outlet, and never let "a source" stand alone. Then keep the proof.

Go back to your last story and check each paragraph against the decision table. If you're just starting out, our guide on how to become a journalist covers the other skills editors look for. Then try ParrotNotes free on your next interview, so every quote you attribute comes with a timestamp.