On the record, on background, not for attribution and off the record are prearranged agreements between a reporter and a source, which govern how specific information can be used. These deals must be agreed to beforehand, never after. A source can not say “I killed my brother and stuffed him with parmesan cheese and pimentos” then attempt to take it back by claiming it was “off the record.” It’s too late.
When dealing with individuals who are not experienced in talking with reporters, journalists should make sure ground rules and potential consequences are clear, and then perhaps offer leeway. Of course, if the information isn't integral to the story, a reporter can agree not to use it.
If you talk to five journalists, you'll likely get five different definitions for these terms. That is why it's important that a reporter clarify them with a source before making any agreements.
“On the record” means anything the source says can be reported, published, or aired. All conversations are assumed to be on the record unless the source expressly requests -- and the reporter explicitly agrees—to go off the record beforehand. If the reporter agrees to change “on the record” to something else, the reporter should be sure to mark notes clearly so that it's possible to see what's on the record and what is not at a later date. Never rely on memory and always try to get back “on the record” as quickly as possible.
“On background” and “not for attribution” are similar. On background is a limited license to print what the source gives you without mentioning the source's name. Most veteran reporters will not use "on background" information until they can verify it with other sources. People try to go “on background” when their information is sensitive, which is to say, the information is likely to cause a stir. “On background” means the source's name does not appear in the story. In effect it confers anonymity on your source, but allows you to work with the information the source has provided. Again, it is best to consult your professor or editor in these situations.
“Not for attribution” means a reporter agrees not to identify a source by name. Identification is provided only by reference to the source's job or position. That identification must be agreed upon by the reporter and the source, and is almost always given in a way that prevents readers from discovering the source's specific identity. (There are rare exceptions, like when dealing with diplomats and expressing a nation's official views.) The reporter should make sure the attribution is accurate and press the source to allow the attribution to be as specific as possible. For example, a reporter would want to attribute information to “a high-ranking official in the Justice Department,” rather than "a high-ranking law enforcement official,” if the source agrees beforehand.
“Off the record” restricts the reporter from using the information the source is about to deliver. The information is offered to explain or further a reporter's understanding of a particular issue or event. (Various presidents have invited reporters to have dinner with the understanding that no information from this meeting can ever be published.) If the reporter can confirm the information with another source who doesn't insist on speaking off the record (whether that means he agreed to talking on the record, on background, or not for attribution) he can publish it.
The problem with the phrase “off the record” is that many people, reporters and the general public alike, misunderstand its precise meaning. These days many interviewees think “off the record” is synonymous with “on background” or “not for attribution.” There is so much murkiness about what “off the record” means that it is essential the reporter and source agree on a definition before beginning an “off the record” portion of an interview. In NYU’s Journalism Institute, “off the record” means the information should not be used in the story unless the reporter can confirm it through another source. In general, it is best to avoid off the record conversations; another option might be to converse off the record then try to convince the source to agree to waive the agreement.