Don't Kiss, Don't Tell

I would have to consider why the source might want to pull their quotes. Generally speaking, as long as I was clear about my intention, the source would have to give a pretty good reason why I shouldn't quote them. I would politely remind them that the story is going to run regardless, and pulling their information could result in their side not being presented equally. If they could not present a good reason to pull the quotes, I might assume that I did something to lose their trust or confidence and would attempt to regain it, but, ultimately, I would still run with the information.
Of course, this is all on a case by case basis, there are no rules on deciding when to play hard ball. You have to go with your gut. Is it worth jeopardizing your source? Sometimes you have to take that chance. Is it worth compromising your obligation to the public? We can't forget that journalism is a public service, and your integrity as a public servant relies on your commitment to that function. But are you doing the public a better service by pulling quotes, and keeping sources owing you? Perhaps this source could be more lucrative for a future story.
So, the dichotomy between respecting your sources questionable wishes and adhering to the popular demand of full disclosure continues to swirl in the vortex of public interest. In the debate as to whether to allow a source to withdraw quotes after putting them on the record we have gone from no to yes and back to no, and, with that, we have come full circle.

k-