|
I am not defending AR or making claims that the girls interviewed are real, maybe she doesn't sound credible/isn't credible because of her writing, lack of sources etc. But,
1. had she listed the names of Suzie Q, R, S, & T and their respective organizations ya'll would be even more up in arms over her lack of discretion. Not to mention that hell would probably reign down on that/those particular organizations, and members involved in her "story".
2. Despite what ya'll think of her, her tactics, her approach, her tackling the subject, etc. and whether or not you believe that the book is of a journalistic/academic nature, she doesn't have to reveal the identities of her sources, especially IF she is trying to protect them. Hell there is a legal battle over confidentiality of informants/sources battle right now.
3. As for her footnotes or whatever, how "credible" could any of her sources be if no Council or Org HQ would deal with her. Because she isn't using "official" sources that would please most people, she did use the sources that were available to her, and many times in research that is all that you can do. I know from extensive academic research on topics that have yet to be well researched and thus have no significant body of sources.
|