Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why did journalists help the Justice Department identify a leaker?

theintercept.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 37 posts

Re: Why did journalists help the Justice Department identify a leaker?

#11

Post by remarkEon »

mint2 wrote: post #5

Bellingcat isn’t a news org. Most of what I saw was rehashes of their analysis. Second, journalists use their own judgement or what to publish. Had the kid given it to a news org the reporting would have been redacted. I object to the new definition of “leaking” that tries to make all cases of it unquestionably good. People can die due to info.

>I object to the new definition of “leaking” that tries to make all cases of it unquestionably good.

I don't think this has ever been the case. There's still large contingents of the US that think the Snowden leaks were part of a Russian operation, that the Manning leaks were bad and so on. I wasn't alive during Vietnam, but were those leaks considered unquestionably good?

Re: Why did journalists help the Justice Department identify a leaker?

#12

Post by ohgodplsno »

exbotanical wrote: post #9

That this happened the way it did is deeply concerning and should anger you. The media worked with a rare diligence to help the government apprehend someone who made information about which we've been repeatedly lied to available to the public. Let's not forget both the media and the government have spent the last couple of weeks on a gaslighting tour telling us the leak was Russian propaganda, etc. The tenacity with…

>who is, contrary to what we were told, winning the war

So you haven't read any documents in the end? Because the worst that these documents say is "mostly stalemate, losses here and wins there". Of course Ukraine isn't overwhelmingly winning, but if you believed that, you just believed war propaganda. You shouldn't be angry at it, because it's literally what happens in every, single war. Every camp will overstate their wins and downplay their losses to the public.

Re: Why did journalists help the Justice Department identify a leaker?

#13

Post by kadoban »

exbotanical wrote: post #9

That this happened the way it did is deeply concerning and should anger you. The media worked with a rare diligence to help the government apprehend someone who made information about which we've been repeatedly lied to available to the public. Let's not forget both the media and the government have spent the last couple of weeks on a gaslighting tour telling us the leak was Russian propaganda, etc. The tenacity with…

> Let's not forget both the media and the government have spent the last couple of weeks on a gaslighting tour telling us the leak was Russian propaganda, etc.

Who has been saying this? First time I've heard it. The closest I've heard is that there's two versions of the "leak", one with modified numbers making it look better for Russia. Which still appears to be true.

> We have US troops on the ground presumably fighting Russia

Does not appear to be true. What are you basing this on?

Re: Why did journalists help the Justice Department identify a leaker?

#14

Post by netsharc »

remarkEon wrote: post #6
ttctciyf wrote: post #2

Maybe it was a case where "practices fell short of the standards to which we hold ourselves” as in the events recounted in [1]. 1: https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/real...

Full quote: >The Intercept was widely criticized for its handling of the document Winner leaked—in particular, the decision to show the leaked document to the U.S. government. While attempting to verify its authenticity with the NSA, an Intercept reporter inadvertently revealed its provenance. According to an FBI affidavit, the document had a telltale crease in it, indicating it had been printed and folded. An FBI ag…

> investigators discovered she’d emailed The Intercept from her work computer.

Hah, I think even without the paper, she would've been toast as soon as the email admins checked their logs...

Re: Why did journalists help the Justice Department identify a leaker?

#15

Post by petertodd »

The guy was a leaker, not a whistleblower. He had no intention of giving the information he leaked to the general public. That just happened by accident. And of course, helping Ukraine defend itself from a genocidal invasion is a very popular cause; this leaker was doing serious harm to that cause. He was no Snowden.

In that circumstance, why wouldn't journalists chase clicks and show off their investigational skills like any other news story?

Re: Why did journalists help the Justice Department identify a leaker?

#16

Post by adfgadfhionio »

>A duty of care arguably extends beyond one’s immediate source: You don’t have to assist an individual in publicizing the workings of government, but at the very least, you should not intentionally compromise them.

This is, as far as I can tell, the only real substance in this article, and it is completely undefended. If journalists have an obligation to avoid exposing leakers, then the actions of these organizations were inappropriate. But the author does absolutely nothing to establish that journalists have such an obligation.

There are leaks of classified material that are, I think, plainly harmful. This is one of them. None of the information I have seen revealed is useful to the public, but may be useful to the Kremlin. No responsible journalist would have published this information had it been provided to them. I see no reason to want to encourage this kind of "transparency".

>NPR recently decried being labeled by Twitter as state-affiliated media, writing that this is a label Twitter uses “to designate official state mouthpieces and propaganda outlets.” That unrelated controversy is notable given that an NPR staffer seems to have deputized himself to act as a government investigator by posting image analyses on Twitter. (While NPR has announced that its official organizational accounts have quit Twitter, individual staff accounts still appear to be active.)

"Unrelated" is right. Why bring in conspiracy theories?

Re: Why did journalists help the Justice Department identify a leaker?

#17

Post by remarkEon »

netsharc wrote: post #14
remarkEon wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Full quote: >The Intercept was widely criticized for its handling of the document Winner leaked—in particular, the decision to show the leaked document to the U.S. government. While attempting to verify its authenticity with the NSA, an Intercept reporter inadvertently revealed its provenance. According to an FBI affidavit, the document had a telltale crease in it, indicating it had been printed and folded. An FBI ag…

> investigators discovered she’d emailed The Intercept from her work computer. Hah, I think even without the paper, she would've been toast as soon as the email admins checked their logs...

For sure, The Intercept got dragged for that episode because of how shoddy their controls were. Winner would've been "got" regardless, just maybe a little bit later.

Re: Why did journalists help the Justice Department identify a leaker?

#18

Post by remarkEon »

pessimizer wrote: post #10
ttctciyf wrote: post #2

Maybe it was a case where "practices fell short of the standards to which we hold ourselves” as in the events recounted in [1]. 1: https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/real...

The Reality Winner leak wasn't real, it was intentional. It was a leak of no importance (more summaries and assessments i.e. editorial) that claimed Russiagate stuff was true. The most important part of the leak was the identity of the woman who leaked it, who was a Bernie supporter with idiosyncratic politics. The goal was to bring the Bernie wing of the Democrats into the anti-Russian buildup by putting it into the…

>the growing cynic consensus is that this leak is fake, too.

Hard time squaring that with the hyperventilating in the press briefings, where administration officials ask journalists not to report on the documents.

Re: Why did journalists help the Justice Department identify a leaker?

#19

Post by ytjaway »

exbotanical wrote: post #9

That this happened the way it did is deeply concerning and should anger you. The media worked with a rare diligence to help the government apprehend someone who made information about which we've been repeatedly lied to available to the public. Let's not forget both the media and the government have spent the last couple of weeks on a gaslighting tour telling us the leak was Russian propaganda, etc. The tenacity with…

You're absolutely right, but you'll be downvoted and flagged. You're too smart for this forum of smooth brains. Don't forget that the average user here thinks themselves as sophisticated, but are probably more propagandized than any average person.

My advice is, don't waste your time here.

Re: Why did journalists help the Justice Department identify a leaker?

#20

Post by [deleted] »

kadoban wrote: post #13
exbotanical wrote: post #9

That this happened the way it did is deeply concerning and should anger you. The media worked with a rare diligence to help the government apprehend someone who made information about which we've been repeatedly lied to available to the public. Let's not forget both the media and the government have spent the last couple of weeks on a gaslighting tour telling us the leak was Russian propaganda, etc. The tenacity with…

> Let's not forget both the media and the government have spent the last couple of weeks on a gaslighting tour telling us the leak was Russian propaganda, etc. Who has been saying this? First time I've heard it. The closest I've heard is that there's two versions of the "leak", one with modified numbers making it look better for Russia. Which still appears to be true. > We have US troops on the ground presumably figh…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN