Meaning: The quote by Adam Clymer, a renowned journalist, touches on the practice of off the record conversations in Washington. This practice has been prevalent in political circles and journalism for many years and has significant implications for transparency and accountability in the public sphere.

In political and journalistic contexts, the phrase "off the record" is used to designate information that is shared with the understanding that it will not be attributed to the source. This can be a valuable tool for journalists, allowing them to gather information and insights that may not be publicly available. Likewise, for politicians and public figures, off the record conversations can provide a space for candid discussions and the sharing of sensitive information without the fear of immediate public scrutiny.

However, as Clymer's quote suggests, the casual and widespread use of off the record conversations in Washington has raised concerns about transparency and accountability. When information is shared off the record, it becomes difficult for the public to fully understand the motivations, decisions, and actions of their elected officials and other influential figures. This lack of transparency can erode public trust and hinder the functioning of a healthy democracy.

Furthermore, the practice of putting things off the record can lead to a culture of secrecy and manipulation. It allows individuals in positions of power to control the narrative and selectively disclose information to serve their interests. This can be particularly concerning in the realm of political journalism, where reporters may become reliant on off the record sources, potentially compromising their independence and the quality of their reporting.

Clymer's remark about the practice "going too far" suggests that the pendulum has swung too heavily in favor of off the record conversations, to the detriment of public accountability. The challenge of turning it back, as he notes, speaks to the entrenched nature of this practice and the difficulties in reversing its impact.

In response to these concerns, some journalists and media organizations have advocated for greater caution and restraint in using off the record information. They argue that journalists should be mindful of the potential consequences of relying on anonymous sources and should prioritize transparency and accountability in their reporting.

Additionally, efforts have been made to clarify and standardize the use of off the record and anonymous sourcing within journalistic ethics guidelines. These guidelines aim to promote responsible and ethical journalism while balancing the need for protecting sources and gathering important information.

From a political standpoint, there is also a broader conversation about the need for increased transparency and accountability in government. Public officials and policymakers are being called upon to be more forthcoming and open in their communications, recognizing the public's right to access information that affects their lives and communities.

In conclusion, Adam Clymer's quote sheds light on the complexities and implications of the practice of putting things off the record in Washington. While off the record conversations can serve important functions in journalism and politics, they also pose challenges to transparency and accountability. Addressing these challenges requires a concerted effort from journalists, policymakers, and the public to uphold the principles of open and responsible communication in the public sphere.