In which I raise concerns abt the specific language targeting Wikileaks in the DNC suit.https://twitter.com/pressfreedom/status/1001493006120378373 …
-
-
One concern I specifically raised in the interview is how DOJ is using Reality Winner's access to secure drop--of the Intercept but not WaPo--as a means to incriminate her.
-
Yes, and I allude to the SecureDrop issue in the opening of the piece—it's important. I think you raise important questions
@jeffhauser about the distinction between leakers/hackers. Those are questions I would have liked to pose to DNC lawyers, if they had agreed to an interview -
But, I think it's also important to acknowledge the role state-backed hackers are playing in the media these days. look at the Broidy stories. We want to be careful about exposing publishers to liability in those cases as well.
-
Agree re Broidy et al. Is there a point at which serving as a knowing "fence" for stolen private data starts becoming something different than publishing genuinely leaked info? And at what point do (or have) people start *actually* adding fake shit into "hacked files"?
-
All great questions, no easy answers. I tried to capture that difficulty in the piece. I think what a lot what concerns people is that those lines could be drawn in the wrong place, b/c of political pressure, sloppy lawsuits, etc.
-
In general, I'd say that we'd want to be really careful about attaching liability to publishing true information in the public interest..No matter the motivations/activities of the sources, be they hackers/whistleblowers, etc.
-
Tweet unavailable
-
I don't think it IS obvious. My biggest complaint abt DNC suit is I don't think it sufficiently distinguishes the two, and at times shows no awareness of dangers of not doing so.
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.