4 ms·
Unfortunately, this is a line that Wikileaks themselves are running with: https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/839120909625606152 https://twitter.com/wikileaks/
by kelnage 10y ago
Unfortunately, this is a line that Wikileaks themselves are running with: https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/839120909625606152 https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/839120909625606152
- tptacek 10y agoRunning misinformation is part of Wikileaks' job. It's not the NYT's job.
- kelnage 10y agoAgreed 100% - but methinks NYT (and others) still look to them for technical guidance on some matters - however misguided that might be.
- tptacek 10y agoThe NYT has a _huge_ list of experts to contact for stories like this. They chose not to, in the interests of getting a salacious lede printed quickly.
- godelski 10y agoWell I think they put out the article first and get experts to correct the finer points later. I don't agree this is the best tactic, but reporting first is important. They have changed the title. Currently: "WikiLeaks Releases Trove of Alleged C.I.A. Hacking Documents"
- tptacek 10y agoSee for instance WaPo, where Greg Miller and Ellen Nakashima got Nicholas Weaver from ICIR on the record for analysis for the story. Compare with the NYT's original story, which had no disclosed expert sourcing. Maybe a habit we should all develop is to first scan these things to see who they got on the record to talk about it. It's not hard for them. I'm not making this up: NYT has a huge list of experts to reach out to for stories. They just chose not to.
- godelski 10y ago> It's not hard for them. I'm not making this up: NYT has a huge list of experts to reach out to for stories. They just chose not to. I wasn't disagreeing with you. I was just saying that their tactic is to publish first and update. This is pretty common, especially in bigger stories. They get paid by getting eyeballs on their site. If someone publishes 20 mins before them they lose money, even if they are more accurate. So just always take a breaking story as a draft. The story isn't finished and I bet will get updated several times.
- throwawayish 10y agoIf I'm not mistaken then the NYT has shown in the past that it can get basic tech/security facts like these straight.
- keknloller 10y ago>misinformation is part of Wikileaks' job. YES! Because they are Russian stooges and they helped Trump get elected!
- jbtule 10y agoThey at least re-clarified on twitter. But not in the article. https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/839160771674255360 https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/839160771674255360
- compuguy 10y agoI believe they've edited the article: "Among other disclosures that, if confirmed, would rock the technology world, the WikiLeaks release said that the C.I.A. and allied intelligence services had managed to bypass encryption on popular phone and messaging services such as Signal, WhatsApp and Telegram. According to the statement from WikiLeaks, government hackers can penetrate Android phones and collect 'audio and message traffic before encryption is applied.'"
- pvg 10y agoIf that's an edit, it's still pretty poor. The 'experts' quoted are Wikileaks themselves. The disclosure 'A spy agency had 0-day exploits for mobile devices' would not rock anything.
- deathhand 10y agoCould you explain more about "misinformation is part of wikileaks' job"
- blfr 10y agoAnd that it's not NYT's job while we're at it.
- germtone 10y agoIn contrast, running McCarthy type propaganda and smear campaigns against Julian Assange/Wikileaks is part of NYT's job. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/04/us/politics/julian-assange-donald-trump.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/04/us/politics/julian-assang... https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/08/business/media/assange-wikileaks-dnc-hacks.html?_r=0 https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/08/business/media/assange-wi...
- soheil 10y agoThe word "effectively" is somewhat clarifying in WL's tweet as opposed to the outright misinformation in NYT's headline, also it's just a tweet and not an article headline from a major newspaper.