What the F Does “On Background” Mean Anyway?

“On background” is an undeniably great phrase—it’s quintessential “I’m a professional”—but not everyone, journalists included, knows exactly what it means. So much so that while writing this explainer, I googled the definition multiple times and found a slightly different answer everywhere I looked, as well as different policies for using background sources depending on the publication. 

To break it down, I talked with Stephen Losey, a longtime government and military reporter. I figured if anyone knows the intricacies and delineations of attribution, it’s someone who covers Washington. 

Losey told me that during interviews, he’ll blatantly ask his sources what rules of attribution should apply. “It just avoids uncomfortable conversations afterwards and unhappy people,” he says. “Even when I’m writing a story about someone that doesn’t paint them in the best light, it’s important to be straight up with people about how their words are going to be used and give them a chance to respond. There shouldn’t be any surprises about how their words are being used in the story.” 

Losey explains that “on background” is just one level on the attribution spectrum ranging from “off the record” to “on the record,” and should be used as sparingly as possible. 

Here’s a primer on the levels of attribution: