A reader points out a somewhat questionable use of anonymous sourcing in the New York Times's story yesterday about James Stewart's new book, Disney War: The Battle for the Magic Kingdom:

Mr. Stewart, along with executives for Simon & Schuster and Disney, declined to discuss the contents of "DisneyWar." But two people who have read versions of the manuscript and are involved in its publication said the book described Disney under siege...Both people agreed to discuss the book's contents with The New York Times, but requested anonymity, fearing reprisals from either top Disney executives or executives at Simon & Schuster.

Says the fishbowlNY reader, who requested anonymity, perhaps fearing reprisals from the anonymous New York Times sources who fear reprisals:

what would those "reprisals" look like? Dopey would show up with a hatchet? Doris Kearns Goodwin, Michael Beschloss and David McCullough would view you unfavorably in the context of American history?

We were going to Photoshop a pic of Dopey with a hatchet, but we feared reprisals from Disney's intellectual property lawyers.

Much Ado About What's in a Book [NYT]