Dean Baker makes a good point over at Beat the Press,

Report What The Politicians Say, Don't Tell Readers What They Believe

Yes, the Post commits this fundamental sin once again telling readers in reference to an omnibus spending bill approved by the Senate that: “all but three Senate Republicans opposed the measure, citing what they consider to be wasteful spending on domestic agencies at a time of war” (emphasis added).

The point of course is that the Post doesn't have a clue as to whether Republican politicians really consider the items in the bill to be wasteful. What it knows is that they say the items are wasteful.

As Baker points out, there are many plausible reasons for the Republicans' actions -- reasons that they'd never admit to. And the Post has no way of knowing that the Republicans' stated reasons are their actual reasons.

This is an extremely common problem, one I've noted in the past:

Gloria Borger on CNN, moments ago: “Conservatives believe that empathy is about feelings, and that feelings have no place when you're deciding the law.”

No. Conservatives say they believe that. But in reality, they support conservative judges who -- they say -- demonstrate empathy.

The difference between “X believes Y” and “X says Y” may seem like nit-picking. And if X really does believe Y, it isn't a big deal. But if X doesn't really believe Y and is just using it as an excuse (or a convenient attack), it is a big deal. It privileges the lie, assuming -- and asserting -- its truthfulness.

And because reporters can rarely be certain whether X believes Y or X just says s/he believes Y, we'd all be better off if they didn't pretend to know what politicians believe.