In the wake of The New York Times’ decision to ban quote approval — a policy allowing sources to cleanse and control their divulged material prior to publication — columnist David Carr wrote, “the first draft of history should not be rewritten by the people who make it.”

Carr nails it head on and sums up the most fatal flaw in contemporary reporting: the journalist’s loss of belief in Thomas Jefferson’s sacred words, “The only security of all is in a free press.”

Most networks permitting quote approval acknowledge its drastic ethical shortcomings, but quickly excuse themselves by claiming they are victims of a catch-22. If they report without adhering the policy they run the risk of misquoting. Report with it, and they’re in just as injurious a bind.

Quote approval exists for primarily two reasons. The first is to dodge the aforementioned issue of misquoting, a common interview roadblock that stems from the unsynchronized speeds of the interviewer’s pen and subject’s voice. And the second is to gain access to sources that would otherwise strip reporters of journalistic privileges.

The first point of contention has been rendered completely invalid by the advent of consumer audio recorders. Technology has given us zero liberties when it comes to misrepresenting source material. But what about the second?

After Jefferson made his legendary statement to the Marquis de Lafayette about what should be an eternally unconditional free press, Jefferson said, “The force of public opinion cannot be resisted when permitted freely to be expressed.”

And he is right. The reason the public exploits the press is because the press allows it. When journalism — something that should reify the most stringent adherence to the values of the American press — begins to settle for anything less, it’s doomed. Regulated material is the price of access because it’s allowed to be.

In a digital age where the ethics watchdogs have more resources than ever to validate information before its release and the tolerance for murky reporting in top newsrooms is at its absolute minimum, it makes little sense why quote approval ever was an accepted practice. From its most extreme scenarios of blatant, self-imposed political censorship to less harmful instances of gnarled verbiage, it’s been a blow to journalistic integrity from the get-go.

So to those journalist who really still believe quote approval is an inevitable vessel to increased public access, the time has come to embrace your role as staunch, contemporary rule-setters. Covering a world that is amorphous at every level requires loyal, unwavering devotion to the established ethics of the free press.

We don’t have to lose the fight against the high-held honor that comes with reporting. Hopefully, enough networks follow suit and carry forth the moral torch lit by the Times to scream blasphemy in the face of an utterly shameful policy.

Siddhi Sundar is a contributing columnist. Email her at [email protected].