As a reporter elsewhere, I believe the Herald either has to name the sources for lying to the paper or discipline Tomase for not communicating properly with the sources or with editors. Or discipline the editors involved.
When you agree to hold someone's name back, you do it even if you go to jail. But all bets are off if they lie. If the sources weren't sure of the info talking to Tomase, they should have told him or he should have understood the gray area and conveyed that to editors. If you're going to use unnamed sources, you better realize as a reporter that their extent of knowledge and your deal about holding the name back is very, very well understood. If editors knew there was no confirmation, then the editor who made the call probaby should be fired.
But somebody lied. That person needs to be outed or fired.
You keep an identity private because you gave your word and won't betray trust. If the source betrays you, you don't have that obligation anymore.
Side issue: a few on here are seizing on the change from a single source in the story to sources (plural) in the apology. On a story like this, The Herald likely talked to several people with varying degrees of knowledge (misinformation) about the situation. Somebody was the primary source telling them that the tape existed. But there may ne a number of partial confirming sources that gave info that fit the story. Someone (THE source) may have told Tomase there was a tape. Then a second person may have said...as a guess...he heard coaches talking about the tape, or a Patriots lawyer talking aboiut the tape or something like that. The second source adds credence to it but isn't strong enough to rely on.
There's also a real chance that the sources were honest about things they had misinformation about and Tomase was honest with editors and then editors made the call that a very gray and sketchy thing was good enough to run with. It's not as if Tomase has a long resume and has worked at a lot of high level papers to have a base of experience in situations like this to draw upon. Typically editors are more experienced than reporters and should be good guides. If an editor told him what to do, he'd probably go along. It takes a ton of balls and ego to tell the editor (your employer) that you're right and he's wrong and either refuse to do the story or insist your byline be pulled from it.
If that was the case, though, name the editors that made that call.
