Employment minister Senator Michaelia Cash during Senate estimates on Wednesday. Credit:Andrew Meares Apart from the political fallout, BuzzFeed's story has also sparked questions about the relationships between journalists and politicians. Are they too cosy? Or is "off-the-record" a sacred beast that should never be sacrificed? While many have praised the Cash staffer scoop - including Canberra press gallery doyenne, Michelle Grattan - BuzzFeed reporter Alice Workman says she's been approached by several colleagues from other outlets, unhappy at her decision to out Cash's office. They say there are certain conventions between the warring sides of journalists and MPs. Revealing a minister's office was behind the news tip could ruin relationships for everyone. There is also concern that off-the-record should always stay that way (even though Canberra has an intermittent history of breaking that rule: think Barrie Cassidy revealing Kevin Rudd was campaigning to return, when he insisted he wasn't). On Wednesday, Daily Telegraph national political editor Sharri Markson tweeted it had been a "shocking night for the media. Some journos clearly do not know how to protect sources". Workman of course didn't directly "out" any sources herself. She says she was approached by (unnamed) journalists on Wednesday – who had been contacted by Cash's office – as it became clear the minister was misleading the Senate (whether inadvertently or not).

"We have a responsibility to call [those in power] out," Workman says. The BuzzFeed reporter explains the specific outlets were not identified in her story because those in question feared losing their jobs. Arguably, the trickier question is whether those who spoke to Workman should have kept their interactions with Cash's office a secret in the first place. Marcus Strom, a former Fairfax journalist and president of the media arm of the Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance, says as a general principle, once journalists accept a confidence it should be respected. But he cautions that the default position of journalists should be to explain to audiences where information is coming from. And he wonders whether we are drifting into a culture where too much information is taken "off-the-record". This is a daily balancing act in the press gallery. Journalists need to speak to sources (mostly politicians, their staffers, public servants and lobbyists) off-the-record or "on background" so they can gather as much information as possible. If they only used on-the-record comments, they would only get the boring, sanitised version of events.

Sean Kelly, a former adviser to Rudd and Julia Gillard, says for politicians and their staff, off-the-record briefings can be incredibly important to make sure journalists properly understand the facts and context of an issue. In the case of news tips – about say, a photo opportunity or a police raid – this means journalists get a story and the MP concerned gets publicity. But while some of this is just practical, some of it errs on the side of mutual back-scratching. And when you look at the response of Immigration Minister Peter Dutton on Thursday, you have to wonder how often it goes too far. "There are a few people who are happy to take leaks because that helps them in their job as a journalist and then they turn around and bite the hand that feeds them," he told radio 2GB's Ray Hadley. Readers, listeners and viewers may also be uncomfortable at the thought that journalists are privy to things – important, game-changing things – that they are not sharing publicly for the sake of their ongoing relationships with those in power. It's easy to take the high road and say, "everything on the record, always". But the reality is, journalism – and the art of getting the good information – is also a long game. And can be just as political as the politics itself.