The Intercept has a story about the surveillance story the NYT didn't want to publish. Here's a story abt the surveillance story The Intercept didn't publish. https://www.emptywheel.net/2018/01/03/why-i-left-the-intercept-the-surveillance-story-they-let-go-untold-for-15-months/ …
-
Show this thread
-
Had the Intercept published on 702 collection on location-obscuring collection BEFORE NSA got the Tor exception in 2014, FISC might have provided more protections for it. https://www.emptywheel.net/2018/01/03/why-i-left-the-intercept-the-surveillance-story-they-let-go-untold-for-15-months/ …
1 reply 15 retweets 33 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @emptywheel
I like this, cuz it's inside baseball about a reporter's labour trade & that interests me. Honest Q: is it reasonable from a certain perspective (the publication's) to say that you were using your 702 background for leverage?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @BradenMack
By background you mean that I had written more about it than anyone, and reported on several of the things that got counted as Snowden scoops?
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
-
Replying to @BradenMack
My method for reporting on surveillance starts with documents.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @emptywheel
Yes, I read your post carefully. I gather that the docs were the Intercept's, and that you were interested in doing the work that that access enabled. From that angle, They could be said to use the access for leverage... Just trying to feel the negotiating dynamic here.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Some of the documents. As I note, I'm the only journalist (with the possible exception of Charlie Savage) who has read both the officially released and Snowden ones.
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.