What Happened
A review of major news outlets' reporting in March 2026 found that the phrase "some are saying" or variations like "some argue," "some claim," or "some believe" appeared in 847 published news stories. In 623 of those cases (74%), no actual sources were identified. The claims were attributed to anonymous or vague groups. "Some are saying the president has lost the confidence of Republican senators" appeared without identifying any senators. "Some argue this policy will cause economic harm" appeared without naming economists. "Some believe this is a coordinated effort" appeared without specifying who or providing evidence.
The phrase serves a specific function: it allows journalists to introduce claims that are either unverified, inflammatory, or impossible to attribute to specific sources, while maintaining the appearance of reporting. It's gossip laundered into news. A fact-based article requires sources. An opinion-based article requires identification of the opinion-holder. But a "some are saying" article requires only a vague claim without accountability. The journalist can plant rumors, spread innuendo, and fuel speculation without having to defend or source any of it.
When you see "some are saying" in a news article, what you're reading is "we heard this somewhere and it's interesting but we can't stand behind it." A responsible outlet would say either "we don't know who believes this" or "we can't verify this claim." Instead, they publish the claim anyway under cover of "some say." The structure is dishonest: it smuggles unverified information into news sections while maintaining the appearance of professional reporting.
Why This Matters
"Some are saying" is how rumors become mainstream talking points. A vague claim published in reputable outlets gains legitimacy through repetition, not through evidence. Other outlets quote the original "some say" reporting, which now appears to confirm the rumor: "As reported in the Times, some are saying..." The original rumor is now laundered into apparent fact through citation patterns.
This is how misinformation spreads through supposedly professional channels. You don't need to invent a false story. You just publish rumor using the "some say" framework, watch it get repeated across outlets, and suddenly a completely unverified claim is part of the news ecosystem. The phrase "some are saying" should be understood as a red flag: this information lacks source attribution and evidence.
The Accountability Vacuum
Good journalism has a simple rule: if you say something, you either source it or you say it as your own opinion and take responsibility for it. "Some are saying" lets journalists violate this rule. It's neither sourced reporting nor transparent opinion. It's anonymous attribution that serves the publication's interests while protecting them from accountability. If a sourced claim is wrong, the source bears some responsibility and can be questioned. If an opinion is wrong, the writer bears responsibility. But "some are saying"? Nobody bears responsibility. The claim floats in the information space without tether.
Until news outlets stop using "some are saying" as a dumping ground for unverified gossip, journalism will continue degrading. The phrase should be banned from professional reporting. If you can't identify your source, you either say "according to anonymous sources" (at minimum transparency) or you don't print it. The current system allows journalists to have it both ways: report the rumor for engagement while maintaining the appearance of journalistic standards. That's not journalism. That's gossip with a byline.
Sources
Snopes: "Analysis of 'Some Are Saying' in News Reporting"
Poynter Institute: "Standards for Anonymous Sourcing"
Pew Research Center: "How Rumors Become News"