Protecting sources is one of the fundamental principles of journalism.

My rule of thumb has always been, “Don’t allow a source to go off-the-record if you can help it, but if you agree to confidentiality, never break that pledge.”

Frankly, I hate “off-the-record” conversations. While sometimes necessary, they can be problematic in so many ways.

One of the most obvious problems faced Raleigh News and Observer Executive Editor John Drescher recently when he learned that John Edwards had lied to him about having an affair with a former staff member.

Do you still owe confidentiality to a source after you find out he lied to you?

Drescher ”outed” Sen. Edwards in a column when the affair became public knowledge. He broke his pledge of confidentiality.

Edwards had called Drescher last fall, shortly after the National Enquirer reported on the affair. In the phone call, Edwards denied the affair and asked Drescher to keep it out of the newspaper. The former presidential candidate even went so far as to mention his wife’s illness, suggesting that publishing the story would be bad for her health (she’s fighting cancer).

The News and Observer, as well as other papers in Edwards home state of North Carolina, have taken a load of criticism for not reporting more aggressively on the affair - even though the Enquirer’s original story was based on a single unnamed source.

No doubt Drescher was unhappy with Edwards. The senator’s behavior was unconscionable - on several fronts.

But was Drescher right to violate his “off-the-record” pledge to Edwards. Does it matter whether the source tells the truth or not?

Drescher defends his decision like this:

“I feel like ‘off-the-record’ is an unwritten contract where the source - and he’s the one who has to go off-the-record - says, “I have truth I want to tell you, but I have my reasons for not wanting to attach my name to it, so can we go off the record.” And I feel like that contract was broken in this case.”

True, Edwards broke his end of the deal. An implied part of any “off-the-record” agreement is that the source is providing accurate information.

But I’m not sure it’s fair to make the general statement that “off-the-record” agreements can be thrown out the window if the source is caught in a lie.

I can think of plenty of situations where a source’s original reason for needing confidentiality - worry about losing his job, or his life - would still be valid, even if it turns out the information was bad.

In this case, I can’t argue with Drescher’s decision. He didn’t owe Edwards anything.

But I wouldn’t necessarily favor a general standard that said a lie frees a journalist from the obligation to nonor a pledge of confidentiality. I think that’s going too far.

Notes: Thanks to Janet Mendler of MPA for pointing me to this story. A Q&A on this issue can be found on the ProPublic.org site: http://www.propublica.org/article/when-off-the-record-sources-lie-826/#When:12:30:00Z. Drescher’s column can be found
here: http://www.newsobserver.com/2711/story/1181346.html. 

I suppose I should be experiencing profound emotions - something deep in the pit of my stomach.

Tomorrow I’m going to rise when the alarm beeps, shower, dress, eat breakfast and head off to work - but not at a newspaper.

It’s a strange feeling, but not a bad one. Not really what I expected - if one can really expect an emotion.

With a few minor breaks in between jobs, I’ve worked for a newspaper of one sort or another since I graduated from college in 1974. That’s when I started my first full-time job as a reporter at the Statesman Journal (the photo at right was taken in about 1975, when I was covering the school board) in Salem, Ore.

During 24 years with the Gannett Co., which purchased the Statesman my second day on the job, and seven years with Thomson Newspapers, I’ve worked at 10 different newspapers in six states. I held every job from reporter to publisher, but most of the time I was an editor.

I did take one year off to get my master’s degree from Northwestern University, and two of my years with Thomson were in corporate jobs.

The Monroe Evening News, where I’ve worked as managing editor the last three years, was my 11th newspaper. Ironically, I started work on Aug. 15, 2005, and my last day was Aug. 15, 2008.

Thirty-four years as a newspaperman ended Friday.

Tomorrow I’ll cart a box full of books, files and miscellaneous stuff into my new office at Monroe County Community College. My new business card reads “Assistant Professor of Journalism and Humanities.”

I thought maybe I’d feel lost.

But the anticipation of new challenges seems to be pulling harder at my heart than that empty feeling.

And besides, I’m not really leaving newspapers behind. One of my jobs at MCCC is advising The Agora, the student newspaper.

I won’t be the editor. That job is in the capable hands of student Emily Chandonnet. But I’ll be close enough to the action to smell the ink.

And I can’t wait to get started.

It sounds so simple …

I know that’s a line from a James Taylor song, I just can’t remember which one. Help, someone?

What could be more simple than deciding the order of comments following a story on our Website.

Should reader comments start with the most recent, and go backwards, or start with the first comment, and continue chronologically?

On Monroenews.com, they start with the most recent. That way, if you’re checking back frequently, you don’t have to go hunting for the most recent comments. And if you’re coming in late and there already are many comments, it’s not that difficult to scroll to the end and read from the bottom up.

That’s the explanation I gave a recent caller who questioned why the comments are “upside down,” in his words.

And if it’s so simple, why is it just the opposite on MonroeTalks?

There, each thread starts with the original comment, and stays in chronological order. If you’re following a long thread, you can use the page links at the top of the thread to jump to the end, where the most recent comments are located.

And you can follow along even more easily by using the “Recent Posts” feature or the “Show unread posts since your last visit” feature. Both take you right to the most recent comments. If you need to catch up on what was said earlier on a thread, you can use the page links to move back and forth in the thread.

But back to the question. What do you think? Do we have it rightside up, or upside down? Should comments on stories be the same as on the forums - starting at the beginning and staying in order. Or should MonroeTalks be turned upside down, with most recent comments at the top?

It sounds so simple …

That was the headline on a column I wrote for Sunday’s Evening News.

Yes, I’m leaving The Evening News to teach full-time at Monroe County Community College.

I’m excited about the opportunity to pass on some of my experience in journalism to young (and not-so-young) students at the community college. My last day at the Evening News is Aug. 15.

But, as the headline suggests, I’m not really leaving The Evening News. I expect to maintain a close relationship with my friends and colleagues at the newspaper, working with them on a variety of projects.

And I’m keeping the News Notes blog - at least until I see how it goes.

It will be fun to comment on the media - including The Evening News - from the perspective of an outside expert (so to speak) instead of an insider.

And after a year of moderating MonroeTalks.com, I can now actually say what I want to on the talk forums, instead of carefully representing the newspaper’s position.

I’ll still be a journalist. Being impartial and looking at both sides is part of who I am after 30 years as a reporter and editor of one sort or another. But when I comment, it won’t be as an Evening News employee, but as a journalism professor - an independent viewpoint.  

 That could be a lot more fun.