Justin Elliot takes the NYT, the LAT, the AP, the WaPoo, the Boston Globe, and CNN (and by implication, among others) to task for shameless stenography:
Now, there are legitimate uses for anonymity in journalism. But it's hard to see how granting an administration official anonymity to advance an entirely self-serving argument -- thus removing the risk that the official can be challenged on what he or she said in the present or later on -- serves any defensible purpose.
And what self-serving argument are we talking about? The first label for this blog post may give you a hint.
[Added] Related: Fallows, "More on 'Destroy the Town'."