What Does 'On/Off The Record' Really Mean?
Journalism jargon explained
Are we off the record? On background? Is this quotable? Ever wondered how reporters know what they can publish, who they can name and when they have to keep their notebooks shut?
There’s a secret dance between journalists and their sources but I’m here to spill the beans. First, let’s decode the jargon that keeps journalism ticking:
On the record: Anything said can be quoted, attributed to them by name and used freely in a story. This is usually the default in an interview unless otherwise agreed. (Example: “We’re planning a major restructuring of the company next quarter to focus on AI and automation,” said Jane Doe, CEO of XYZ.)
On background: The information can be used in a story but not usually directly quoted, and the person cannot be named. (Example: A source familiar with XYZ’s internal strategy said the company is planning a major restructuring to prioritise AI and automation in the next quarter.)
On deep background (yes, really!): Even more restrictive than “on background.” The information can be used but without any attribution, not even vague. Typically, the information is just presented as part of the journalist’s own reporting. (Example: XYZ is expected to undergo a major restructuring next quarter, with a growing focus on AI and automation.)
Off the record: Information shared cannot be used in a story at all – not quoted, not paraphrased and not attributed. It’s just for the journalist’s understanding or context. (This information would not appear in the piece at all.)
Not for attribution: A hybrid between “on background” and “on the record.” The info can be quoted directly but can’t be linked to the individual directly by name. The source gets a generic title or role. (Example: “We’re planning a major restructuring of the company next quarter to focus on AI and automation,” said an insider at XYZ.)
Quotable: This means the source has given explicit permission to be quoted directly. But whether their name can be used depends on additional context. You should clarify what level of attribution is allowed. (Example: Quotable and on the Record could look like this - “We’re planning a major restructuring of the company next quarter to focus on AI and automation,” said Jane Doe, CEO of XYZ. But quotable and not for attribution would be this - “We’re planning a major restructuring of the company next quarter to focus on AI and automation,” said an insider at XYZ.)
Now...I’m about to throw a spanner in the works. I sent these definitions to a few journalist friends for their thoughts. While most agreed, some didn’t. “Off the record” meant something completely different to one senior editor than the definition above.
Which brings me on to the most important point of this edition...the jargon is murky! Make sure you are absolutely clear what terms you’re speaking on when you meet with a journalist. Spell out what you expect when you say “on background”. Don’t assume that your definition is the same as theirs. It turns out we all have different ideas!
And to add to the confusion... if someone tells a journalist something in one conversation that they can’t share with the public but they’re able to verify by other means that lets them run the story...well, then, that changes the playing field. Some might argue that it’s fair game.
So, how do you figure out what ground you’re standing on before the first question is even asked? Interviews most often begin “on the record,” with the understanding that anything said can be quoted and attributed. Then, midstream, a source might pause and say “this part is off the record”, share what they want to keep private, and later return to speaking on the record.
There’s no automatic rule about whether a conversation over coffee (or a context that isn’t a formal interview) is on or off the record. It all comes down to what the journalist and the source agree to...ideally upfront (but even then that doesn’t always happen). When it comes to informal settings like coffee chats, expectations can blur. Those chats wouldn’t inherently be “off the record”. I would advise people to set the terms of the conversation when meeting with a journalist. Doing this helps build trust, avoids confusion and ensures everyone knows where the lines are.
These boundaries aren’t just casual, they’re essential. Most journalists would never attribute a quote to a source without clear permission. Trust is the currency here. Protecting a source’s identity isn’t just a professional courtesy, it’s a fundamental rule of journalism.
Remember folks, keep this advice just between us! We’re off the record.
I’m now offering media masterclasses for brands looking to sharpen their storytelling, improve their relationships with journalists and boost their media coverage. If you’re interested, please contact me at stephspyro1@gmail.com