“We’re not going to kill him. We just want to talk to him… We’re not going to hurt this guy. We just want to sit him down and find out why he did what he did. You will not in any way be revealed. You will be well-rewarded and well-protected,” he tells Lauria in a voicemail that can only be described as something Joe Pesci would say in a Scorcese film. Lauria had written that of the band as “sexy but talentless” and that Redstone had taken his “dirty old man act too far” by forcing the band on MTV. Now Redstone wants the identity of the person who told Lauria of the band, but just “to talk.”

The voicemail lasts about three minutes and isn’t all a long “don’t think of an elephant” game with the anonymous source’s life. Redstone also takes the time to defend the group in question, the Electric Barbarellas (named after the 1997 Duran Duran single, we assume), calling them “the best show we’ve seen in ten years” and defending their honor against the unsourced accusations that they are being forced onto MTV despite being slightly less impressive than Redstone would have the media believe.

It appears that Lauria is very much so not interested in disclosing the identity of his source, writing “sorry, Sumner, but happy hunting”— even if Redstone says it is “inevitable” he will be found out, as it has been narrowed down to four possibilities. Lauria also doesn’t seem interested in playing nice with Redstone at all, as he released the strangely alluring audio of the entire voicemail, which, courtesy of the Daily Beast, you can listen to below:

It shouldn’t surprise anyone that some are voicing their concerns (and doubting his emotional sincerity) about Beck, albeit anonymously, but there’s a very simple reason why it doesn’t matter.

Kurtz talks about the opinion of Fox CEO Roger Ailes early on in the piece:

Beck is drawing big ratings. But there is a deep split within Fox between those — led by Chairman Roger Ailes — who are supportive, and many journalists who are worried about the prospect that Beck is becoming the face of the network…

Ailes has occasionally spoken to Beck about the negative tone of his 5 p.m. program. And Beck, in turn, sometimes seeks Ailes’s advice.

And that’s why the rest of the piece doesn’t really matter. The buck stops in Ailes’ office, and if he’s given his stamp of approval on Beck’s program and style, the rest of the lower level grumbling is moot. No other CEO in America is as closely tied to his company’s product as Ailes (possibly with the exception of Steve Jobs), and with Fox News’ huge ratings, and more importantly, huge profits, he is in full control.

A Fox News spokesperson tells Mediaite: “Howie’s use of anonymous sources is stunning from a paper with the reputation of the Washington Post’s. Glenn Beck has the 100% support of Fox News management.”

But while we’re here, let’s talk about Glenn Beck some more (something we at Mediaite enjoy regularly). If you’re curious about where the grumbling might be coming from, let’s take a closer look. We can safely say it’s not from Bill O’Reilly, the biggest star at Fox News still, who enjoys having Beck on his program regularly and recently toured the country with him. It probably doesn’t come from Fox & Friends, where Beck appears as well.

Where does Beck not show up? Well, one show is Sean Hannity‘s 9pm ET program. At the same time Beck was joining Fox News from HLN, Hannity was finally getting the chance to have his own show (with Alan Colmes leaving the program). He was the clear silver medalist in the FNC personality department – and now he’s clearly the bronze, with Beck stepping up to the #2 spot (or, in some metrics, #1). Wouldn’t it make sense for the two to occasionally cross-promote on each other’s shows? It hasn’t happened. Also, there’s the possibility for some Neil Cavuto tension, whose longtime FNC program Your World comes on before Beck’s. His former executive producer Gresham Striegel left FNC (and Beck’s program) recently to join MSNBC.

But again, the point is it doesn’t ultimately matter. While Beck boosts sales of books, brings down members of the Obama administration and other organizations and systematically changes the television news format in his own unique way, his star power within FNC and outside it are growing. And with Ailes as his backer, it will continue to grow and help both Beck personally and FNC as a whole.

One final note. This was a fun exchange:

Some staffers say they have watched rehearsals, on internal monitors, in which Beck has teared up or paused at the same moments as he later did during the show. Asked about this, Balfe responded sharply: “Glenn reacts the same way to issues whether he knows people are watching or not, and is proud to show his emotions, unlike the cowardly, two-faced critics who hide behind anonymity.”

Say what you want about Glenn Beck, but it’s not an act – and he’s not hiding from anyone.

—–
» Follow Steve Krakauer on Twitter

As far as TPM posts go, there didn’t seem to be anything wrong with the story, which began “Multiple sources tell TPMDC that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is very close to rounding up 60 members in support of a public option with an opt out clause …”

But Harvard’s Nieman Journalism Lab noticed that TPM was taking an unusual amount of criticism for the story’s use of anonymous sources. Aside from the headline and the lede, the post later attributes a quotation to “one source close to negotiations.”

Most of the commenters who took exception with this particular story complained that anonymously sourced stories rarely prove to be accurate. Others waxed cynical about the state of journalism and reporting. A few examples:

Experience has taught me to doubt anything that comes out of the mouths of these anonymous staffers because the overwhelming percentage of the time, what they say turns out to be complete bullshit.

That said, it looks to me that we have conflicting reports (again), hanging on anonymous sources (again), without much insight into the wider context of the negotiations and fundamentally at odds with other things that are in the president’s self interest. The pattern is familiar, as is the swift “clarifications” that come from the WH repudiating the reporting. Fortunately today, there are so many items in motion that the next rumor being floated will occupy our attention.

Okay… How many of these anonymously sourced stories are we going have to endure? First, the PO is off the table. Then it’s on. Then there are the votes for it. Then there aren’t.

It’s madness! We keep getting anonymous stories like this, only to have them knocked down by principals who are actually directly involved in pulling these bills together.

I not yet seen one of these “sources say” stories that is actually correct.

There seems to be too many moving parts right now — so many that the people who are directly involved are still trying to gauge exactly where the votes are.

And the end of the day, we have no idea what’s really going on, and the tales spread by anonymous sources are not going to give us any further clue. (Hey – “journalists”! Anonymous sources lie all the time!)

Media critic Jay Rosen, however, hit the nail on the head, writing “Why do we need you to be Politico?” And Politico, which has brought the rigor and integrity of hard-nosed political reporting from print to the web, might be the perfect counter-example. TPM, for its part, has brought the utility of Web reporting to politics. And to great success.

As frustrating as it may be to read this brand of speculative reporting on such a nuanced and sensitive issue as Executive and Legislative back-and-forth over health care reform, there’s something to be said for being quick to publish and seeing what sticks. This is actually an example of the TPM reporting model working at its best: wonky readers calling foul on anonymously reported stories that don’t seem to hold water.

Related: 25 Need-To-Know Bloggers You May Not Know Already — Josh Marshall