CRISIS rearranges a lot of lives, our own included. Naturally, TIME'S Washington bureau went on its own full alert: correspondents at the White House, the Pentagon, the State Department and on Capitol Hill found themselves living in the same kind of round-the-clock atmosphere as their sources, and sharing the sleeplessness, anxiety and stimulus of an emergency. All this is part of their job, and ours. But the events, and their unfolding and interpretation, quickly involved us in a situation in which the journalistic ground rules are not always clear. Last week the White House laid down a list of topics ("Any discussion of plans for employment of strategic or tactical forces of the United States . . .") which it asked the press not to publish "during the current tense international situation." The effect of this request was much like the so-called "voluntary censorship" of World War II and the Korean war. The press is asked "to exercise caution and discretion." Since discretion is left to editors, it merely reinforces a sense of responsibility about the national interest that most editors, ourselves included, are mindful of.

Of more basic concern to us is the way the crisis news had to be gathered. It is one thing to stand outside closed doors and ask questions of emerging Congressmen or generals. It is another to be privately told important matters, which we are encouraged to say on our own, but cautioned against citing specific authority for our source. We are well accustomed, in Washington and elsewhere, to interviews "not for attribution," to background briefings and all the other in-between ways of disseminating news. We prefer direct speech and direct attribution, but know that candor is sometimes only privately possible.

This week's coverage of the Cuban crisis makes extensive use of this kind of knowledge. It might be feared that under such arrangements we would surrender some of our independence. The news out of Washington had obvious domestic political overtones, and we, no less than the Administration, are aware of them. But we are not cynically prepared to believe that a President at such a time thinks of himself primarily as the head of a political party, or that career military men and Government officials would collaborate in massive deception for partisan advantage. Many sources contributed to our account who cannot be acknowledged. The relationship was professional: no commitment was given by us as to how we would handle the news, nor were we asked for one. If a thread of knowledgeability is evident through our story--and we think it is--it comes from the interplay of authoritative sources and our own judgment.

THOUGH not on a military assignment, Bill McHale, our Rome bureau chief, met his death last week in the line of duty. He was killed in the plane crash that also took the life of Italy's oil czar, Enrico Mattei, whom he was accompanying to gather material for a story. Whether covering street riots in the Middle East, or undergoing the normal hazards of a much-traveled foreign correspondent, McHale was familiar with danger.

Characteristically, his last assignment involved economics and politics, two fields in which he was well schooled.

But he had a wide-ranging and lively curiosity in many areas, which made him the able journalist he was, and a humane and witty response to life that made him a colleague and friend many of us will sorely miss.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.