State of Denial

If you have been paying any attention to the news, then you know that the latest work of Bob Woodward titled "State of Denial" has touched off a furor in Washington. This is Woodward's third book on the Bush Administration; his two previous books were well received by the White House and cast a favorable light on the Bush Adminstration. When the second book came out, the White House actively suggested that people should pick up a copy and read it.

This third book is critical of the Bush Adminstration and the President himself and has the White House on the defensive. From the little that I have read in excerpts, it portrays the President and his war council as out of touch with reality.

Woodward has a reputation for doing endless hours of research and interviewing his sources extensively. His sources tend to be the main players at a given moment in time, who surprisingly provide him access to documents and notes that otherwise would never see the day of light. His latest book has forced some of his sources to go on TV and deny some of the statements and actions attributed to them in the book.

Which brings me to this question that puzzles me. How come these sources agree to speak to Woodward in depth in the first place? Don't they know that anything and everything they say can be published? Why do something voluntarily and then deny it later? Won't it be better not to provide access at all? How does Woodward manage to persuade these folks to talk in the first place?