Communicating with consumers often relies on them remembering, sharing, and acting upon relevant information. Source memory, the ability to link a claim to its original source, is an essential aspect of word of mouth, affecting accurate recall, attitude formation, and subsequent decision making. We propose that claim objectivity, whether a claim is a fact or an opinion, affects people’s ability to accurately recall the source of a claim. This proposal follows a two-step process: (i) opinions provide more information about sources than facts do; (ii) claims that provide more information about sources during the encoding of information are more likely to be accurately attributed to their original sources during recall. Across ten pre-registered experiments (N=5,728) and a variety of consumer domains we investigate the effect of claim objectivity on source memory. We find that source memory is more accurate for subjective claims (opinions) than for objective claims (facts), with no consistent effect on recognition memory for claims. We find support for the proposed process by manipulating facts to be more informative about sources and opinions to be less informative about sources. Our results indicate that opinions are more likely to be accurately attributed to their original sources than are facts.