On Background vs Off the Record at a Glance
The two terms describe different deals. On background, the reporter can use what you say but not your name. Off the record, the reporter cannot publish what you say at all, under the Associated Press definitions. The table sets out the differences using the AP's published wording, with notes where other newsrooms differ. “Better” is marked only where the published rules show a real difference for a company spokesperson.
| Category | On background | Off the record | Better for a spokesperson |
|---|---|---|---|
| Can the information be published? | Yes, “under conditions negotiated with the source” (AP) | No: “cannot be used for publication” (AP) | Depends on the goal |
| Is the source named? | No; usually a description of position is agreed | No | Same |
| Typical attribution | “A company executive”, “a person familiar with the plans” | None; nothing is attributed | Depends |
| Can the reporter seek the same facts elsewhere? | Yes, per AP | Yes, per AP | Same |
| Do definitions vary by newsroom? | Yes, NYU calls it a “limited license” | Yes, more than any other term | On background is more consistent |
| Main use | Explaining context, numbers or process without a quote | Explaining something that must not appear yet | Depends |
| Main risk | Description narrows identity; opinion may be refused | Misunderstood terms; information confirmed elsewhere | On background has fewer surprises |
Key point: neither status exists unless both sides agree to it before you speak. The NYU journalism handbook says these deals “must be agreed to beforehand, never after” (NYU).
What Does On Background Mean?
On background is a ground rule under which a reporter may publish what a source says without naming the source, attributing it instead to a description the two have agreed in advance.
The AP defines background this way: “The information can be published but only under conditions negotiated with the source. Generally, the sources do not want their names published but will agree to a description of their position” (AP, Telling the Story). The NYU handbook calls it “a kind of limited license to print what the source gives you without using the source's name” and adds that “most veteran reporters will not use ‘on background’ information until they can verify it with other sources.”
A close relative is deep background. AP: “The information can be used but without attribution. The source does not want to be identified in any way, even on condition of anonymity.” In practice the reporter writes the fact in their own voice. NYU also lists “not for attribution” (identification only by job or position) and “on guidance”, which it describes as “a road map she must independently follow.” These labels overlap with background, which is why the terms must be spelled out each time.
What Does Off the Record Mean?
Off the record is a ground rule under which a reporter agrees not to publish information a source provides, which is given only to help the reporter understand a subject.
The AP definition is one line: “Off the record. The information cannot be used for publication.” NYU says it “restricts the reporter from using the information the source is about to deliver” and that the information is offered “to explain or further a reporter's understanding of a particular issue or event.”
The same handbook warns that the term is the least stable of the set: “The problem with the phrase ‘off the record’ is that many people, reporters and the general public alike, misunderstand its precise meaning. These days many interviewees think ‘off the record’ is largely synonymous with ‘on background’ or ‘not for attribution.’” It gives its own institute's rule as an example of the variation: at NYU's Carter Journalism Institute, off the record “means the information should not be used in the story unless the reporter can confirm it through another source.”
How Much Each Rule Lets a Reporter Publish
The AP sets out four levels in one list. On the record: “The information can be used with no caveats, quoting the source by name.” Then background, deep background and off the record, each giving the reporter less to use. The two charts below rank them on two separate questions: how much of the content can appear, and how much the reader learns about who said it.
Classification from the Associated Press definitions, not a measurement
Source: Associated Press, Telling the Story, news values and principles.
Bars rank how much use AP's definitions allow; they are ordinal categories, not quantities. NYU's handbook says its own journalism institute lets reporters use off-the-record information they confirm through another source.
Classification from the Associated Press and NYU definitions, not a measurement
Source: Associated Press, Telling the Story; NYU Journalism Handbook for Students.
Ordinal ranking of attribution detail. The exact description used under background, such as “a company executive”, is negotiated case by case.
The gap that matters most to a spokesperson is between background and deep background. Under background the reader sees a description, and a description such as “a senior executive at the company” can identify you if only two people fit it. Under deep background the reader sees nothing about you, but the reporter states the information on their own authority, which some editors will not allow without a second source.
Setting the Ground Rules: What Newsrooms Require
Major newsrooms publish rules for reporters that tell a company what to expect. Four points recur.
- The default is on the record. The AP says “Reporters should proceed with interviews on the assumption they are on the record. If the source wants to set conditions, these should be negotiated at the start of the interview.” NPR says its “strong preference is to have sources stay ‘on the record’” and that it does “not begin our quest for interviews by promising to keep a source anonymous or off the record” (NPR Ethics Handbook).
- Terms must be explicit. AP: “Not everyone understands ‘off the record’ or ‘on background’ to mean the same things. Before any interview in which any degree of anonymity is expected, there should be a discussion in which the ground rules are set explicitly.”
- No retroactive deals. NYU: “A source can't say something then claim it was ‘off the record.’ That's too late.”
- The reporter will try to move you back on the record. AP: “At the end of the interview, the reporter should try once again to move onto the record some or all of the information that was given on a background basis.”
Editors usually know who you are. The AP says a manager who approves anonymous material “must know the identity of the source, and is obligated, like the reporter, to keep the source's identity confidential.” The BBC says that where it is sought, the relevant editor “has the right to be told a source's identity” (BBC Editorial Guidelines, section 3.4.21). Speaking on background means anonymous to readers, which is a narrower thing than anonymous to the newsroom.
Limits Newsrooms Put on Anonymous Material
Background quotes are not accepted on any terms. AP rules allow material from anonymous sources only if “The material is information and not opinion or speculation, and is vital to the report”, is “not available except under the conditions of anonymity imposed by the source”, and the source is “reliable, and in a position to have direct knowledge of the information.” The AP also says it “routinely seeks and requires more than one source when sourcing is anonymous”, and that “We must explain in the story why the source requested anonymity.”
NPR applies the same logic to opinion: “it is unfair to air a source's opinion on a subject of coverage when the source's identity and motives are shielded from scrutiny.” The SPJ Code of Ethics tells journalists to “Reserve anonymity or confidentiality as a last resort for sources with information of substantial public interest who may face danger, retribution or other harm” and to “Consider motives before agreeing not to identify a source” (SPJ). A company that wants to criticise a competitor on background will usually be refused under these rules, and should be.
A practical consequence: if you want a characterisation or an opinion in print, say it on the record. Background works best for facts a reporter can check, such as how a process works, what a figure includes, or the sequence of events.
What Protection Each Rule Gives You
Once agreed, newsrooms treat the promise as binding. NPR's guideline is headed “Our word is binding”, and the UK Editors' Code says “Journalists have a moral obligation to protect confidential sources of information” (Editors' Code, clause 14). That protects your identity. It does not stop the reporter from learning the same facts elsewhere: the AP says that “information obtained under any of these circumstances can be pursued with other sources to be placed on the record.”
So off the record is weaker protection than many spokespeople assume. If you tell a reporter off the record that a product will be delayed, the reporter cannot cite you, but now knows what to ask others. If the information must not be published yet, the safest choice is not to share it. If it can be published at a set time, an embargo is the tool; see do press embargoes still hold and how to plan an embargoed press announcement.
When On Background Is the Better Choice
- Explaining technical context that a named quote would clutter, such as how a pricing model works.
- Correcting a misunderstanding before publication, so that the story is accurate without a combative quote.
- Walking a reporter through numbers that are already public but hard to read.
- When the reporter can verify what you say from documents, which is what NYU says experienced reporters do anyway.
When Off the Record Is the Better Choice
- Explaining why you cannot comment yet, for example because a regulator or partner must be told first.
- Building understanding of a complex situation with a reporter you know, where nothing you say needs to appear.
- Rarely, if ever, for news itself. Information that is newsworthy and true will often be confirmed elsewhere.
Who Should Use On Background?
Use on background if: you have checkable facts that help a story, and a named quote would be awkward or premature.
Avoid it if: what you want to say is opinion, criticism of others, or something that would identify you through the description.
Best for: communications staff explaining context; subject experts briefing a beat reporter.
Primary strength: information reaches print accurately without your name.
Main limitation: descriptions can identify you, and newsrooms may require a second source.
Verdict: the more useful and more predictable of the two for company communications.
Who Should Use Off the Record?
Use off the record if: you need a reporter to understand something that must not be reported, and you trust that reporter.
Avoid it if: the information is material, market-moving or secret; the reporter can still pursue it with others.
Best for: experienced spokespeople with established relationships.
Primary strength: nothing you say is published or attributed.
Main limitation: the most misunderstood term in media relations, with no single definition.
Verdict: a narrow tool; define it in writing or do not use it.
How to Choose Between On Background and Off the Record
| If you need... | Choose |
|---|---|
| A fact in the story without your name | On background |
| A fact in the story with no attribution at all | Deep background, if the outlet accepts it |
| The reporter to understand something that must not be published | Off the record, defined in writing, or say nothing |
| An opinion or criticism printed | On the record |
| Information released to everyone at a set time | An embargo, not a ground rule |
| One outlet to have the story first | An exclusive; see what an exclusive is in PR |
Before any interview, confirm the ground rules in a short email: the terms, the agreed description, and what happens if you want something on the record later. Our guide to preparing an executive for an interview covers the briefing, and running a media training session covers rehearsal. If you are pitching rather than responding, see how to get quoted as an expert source, where on the record is the point.
Final Verdict: On Background or Off the Record?
For most company communications, on background is the better choice when you cannot be named: the information can be used, the attribution is agreed, and the AP, NPR and NYU rules describe it in broadly the same way. Off the record is the better choice only when the reporter must understand something that cannot appear at all, and only with a reporter you trust and terms you have written down. In both cases the published newsroom rules assume you are on the record unless you agree otherwise first, and both leave the reporter free to confirm the facts elsewhere. If an article later misstates what you said, see how to request a correction.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the difference between on background and off the record?
On background, a reporter can publish what you say but attributes it to an agreed description rather than your name. Off the record, under the AP definition, the information cannot be published at all. Both must be agreed before you speak.
Can a journalist publish something said off the record?
Under the AP definition, not from you. But the AP says information given under any ground rule can be pursued with other sources and placed on the record, and some, including NYU's journalism institute, allow use if the reporter confirms it through another source.
Can I go off the record after I have said something?
No. The NYU journalism handbook says these agreements must be made beforehand, never after, and that a source cannot say something and then claim it was off the record.
What is deep background?
The AP says deep background information can be used but without attribution; the source is not identified in any way. The reporter usually states the fact in their own voice.
Will the editor know who I am if I speak on background?
Often, yes. The AP says the approving manager must know the identity of an anonymous source, and the BBC says the relevant editor has the right to be told. Both are obliged to keep it confidential.
Can I criticise a competitor on background?
Most published policies discourage it. The AP accepts anonymous material only if it is information, not opinion, and NPR says it is unfair to air an opinion when the source's identity and motives are hidden. Say it on the record or not at all.
Should a spokesperson ever use off the record?
Rarely. It is the most misunderstood ground rule, and it does not stop a reporter finding the same facts elsewhere. Use it only with a trusted reporter, with the definition agreed in writing.
How We Compared On Background and Off the Record
Criteria: what can be published, how the source is described, how terms are agreed, limits on anonymous material, and the protection each rule gives. When: the AP, NPR, NYU, SPJ, BBC and Editors' Code pages listed below were read on October 10, 2026. Definitions are quoted from those pages.
Limitations: these are published newsroom policies, and individual reporters and outlets apply their own versions; NYU says five journalists may give five definitions. We did not survey journalists or test how any outlet handles a request. Nothing here is legal advice, and listed companies should take advice on disclosure rules before briefing on any terms.
Sources
- standards Associated Press, Telling the Story, news values and principles: definitions of on the record, off the record, background and deep background; anonymous source rules. Read October 10, 2026.
- standards NYU Arthur L. Carter Journalism Institute, NYU Journalism Handbook for Students, section on the record, on background, not for attribution, off the record and on guidance. Read October 10, 2026.
- standards NPR, Special Section: Anonymous sourcing, NPR Ethics Handbook. Read October 10, 2026.
- standards Society of Professional Journalists, SPJ Code of Ethics, Seek Truth and Report It. Read October 10, 2026.
- official BBC, Editorial Guidelines, Section 3: Accuracy, sections 3.4.20 to 3.4.22 on sources and anonymity. Read October 10, 2026.
- standards Editors' Code of Practice Committee, The Code, clause 14 Confidential sources. Read October 10, 2026.