5 ms·

Why The Intercept closed the Snowden archive

vnchr 8y ago
The author has published a follow-up article: “The Intercept’s editors couldn’t figure out why these leaked emails are important. Can you?”. [1] [1] https://medium.com/@barrettbrown/the-intercepts-editors-couldn-t-figure-out-why-these-leaked-emails-are-important-can-you-5268556bedd https://medium.com/@barrettbrown/the-intercepts-editors-coul...
- gilini 8y ago
  I wonder if he's physically unable to write without being condescending. It really hurts the message.
appleflaxen 8y ago
Anyone have a copy of the full archive? Will it live on at a torrent file somewhere?
- dewey 8y ago
  Read Greenwald’s response, he specifically addressed this point.
  - sqldba 8y ago
    To save you time - no because Snowden didn’t want it to be published in full. Ever.
    - wallace_f 8y ago
      Yes. He wanted journalists to select which documents were in the public's interest, and only those to be released.
- hannasanarion 8y ago
  No, it's supposed to stay secret. A lot of the documents could literally get people killed if released. That's why Snowden gave it to journalists he trusts, not the open internet.
  - Nullabillity 8y ago
    Why put so much effort into protecting the privacy of people dead set on killing it for everyone else?
    - cinquemb 8y ago
      > Why put so much effort into protecting people dead set on killing everyone else? FTFY ;)
    - hannasanarion 8y ago
      How about: because Snowden isn't interested in murder. What if the documents contained the identity of an American mole in ISIS, would you release that? Would you watch the execution video when they chop off his head because you blew his cover? What if the documents contained details of a terrorist plot that the NSA has been tracking, would you release that? Would you apologize to the families of the dead because you tipped off the terrorists on how to avoid law enforcement? That's why Snowden entrusted the documents to journalists that he drilled in security practices, and that's why he gives the Feds an opportunity to comment on or object to each new document release: there is some stuff that rightly deserves to be kept secret. Just because the classification system is regularly abused doesn't mean it shouldn't exist.
  - crispyambulance 8y ago
    >...could literally get people killed if released. Yes, that and the fact that the Snowden documents have served their purpose. We now know how fucking far we actually are from being a free country and that we can't trust the people who operate the security apparatus of the USA. That's the key "take-away". The actual content of their dowdy-looking power point slides from 2013 is less important as time goes on. Whatever Snowden got, it's just a snapshot in time. The projects, I'm sure, have since moved on. The acronyms changed, and I think it's fair to assume that they're exploring new initiatives and pushing towards new frontiers for violating privacy, freedom and law.
randomname2 8y ago
Greenwald's response: https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1106195880393297920 https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1106195880393297920
- tekmate 8y ago
  good thing glenn won't be impacted by these financial constraints, he'll just go on fox news with noted nazi laura ingraham and talk about the "russia hoax"
ckastner 8y ago
This was nonsense. thanks for correcting me.
- 0xDEFC0DE 8y ago
  >Just kidding! It’s only me, Barrett Brown
- appleflaxen 8y ago
  that's because it's actually (if I read it correctly) satire. That's an email from Barrett Brown speaking in the voice of Michael Bloom; later in the message he explains: Just kidding! It’s only me, Barrett Brown; I used to write that column for Intercept about comical prison stuff, and then later I got mad and quit, as is my custom.
cinquemb 8y ago
My opinion of the whole Intercept operation/Snowden affair: "…When their veil of secrecy is shredded and they can no longer rely on a phony cover story to misinform the public, they resort to admitting—sometimes even volunteering—some of the truth while still managing to withhold the key and damaging facts in the case. The public, however, is usually so intrigued by the new information that it never thinks to pursue the matter further."
aristophenes 8y ago
Can someone explain this with context? I am not informed enough about this to understand, I assume others are experiencing something similar.
- wallace_f 8y ago
  This article would be a lot better if it started with the introduction: TI decides to end funding for work on the Snowden archive to cut expenditures. Laura Poitras is very angry about this, here are her thoughts.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]

The author has published a follow-up article: “The Intercept’s editors couldn’t figure out why these leaked emails are important. Can you?”. [1] [1] https://medium.com/@barrettbrown/the-intercepts-editors-couldn-t-figure-out-why-these-leaked-emails-are-important-can-you-5268556bedd https://medium.com/@barrettbrown/the-intercepts-editors-coul...

gilini 8y ago
I wonder if he's physically unable to write without being condescending. It really hurts the message.

appleflaxen 8y ago

Anyone have a copy of the full archive? Will it live on at a torrent file somewhere?

dewey 8y ago
Read Greenwald’s response, he specifically addressed this point.
- sqldba 8y ago
  To save you time - no because Snowden didn’t want it to be published in full. Ever.
  - wallace_f 8y ago
    Yes. He wanted journalists to select which documents were in the public's interest, and only those to be released.
hannasanarion 8y ago
No, it's supposed to stay secret. A lot of the documents could literally get people killed if released. That's why Snowden gave it to journalists he trusts, not the open internet.
- Nullabillity 8y ago
  Why put so much effort into protecting the privacy of people dead set on killing it for everyone else?
  - cinquemb 8y ago
    > Why put so much effort into protecting people dead set on killing everyone else? FTFY ;)
  - hannasanarion 8y ago
    How about: because Snowden isn't interested in murder. What if the documents contained the identity of an American mole in ISIS, would you release that? Would you watch the execution video when they chop off his head because you blew his cover? What if the documents contained details of a terrorist plot that the NSA has been tracking, would you release that? Would you apologize to the families of the dead because you tipped off the terrorists on how to avoid law enforcement? That's why Snowden entrusted the documents to journalists that he drilled in security practices, and that's why he gives the Feds an opportunity to comment on or object to each new document release: there is some stuff that rightly deserves to be kept secret. Just because the classification system is regularly abused doesn't mean it shouldn't exist.
- crispyambulance 8y ago
  >...could literally get people killed if released. Yes, that and the fact that the Snowden documents have served their purpose. We now know how fucking far we actually are from being a free country and that we can't trust the people who operate the security apparatus of the USA. That's the key "take-away". The actual content of their dowdy-looking power point slides from 2013 is less important as time goes on. Whatever Snowden got, it's just a snapshot in time. The projects, I'm sure, have since moved on. The acronyms changed, and I think it's fair to assume that they're exploring new initiatives and pushing towards new frontiers for violating privacy, freedom and law.

randomname2 8y ago

Greenwald's response: https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1106195880393297920 https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1106195880393297920

tekmate 8y ago
good thing glenn won't be impacted by these financial constraints, he'll just go on fox news with noted nazi laura ingraham and talk about the "russia hoax"

ckastner 8y ago

This was nonsense. thanks for correcting me.

0xDEFC0DE 8y ago
>Just kidding! It’s only me, Barrett Brown
appleflaxen 8y ago
that's because it's actually (if I read it correctly) satire. That's an email from Barrett Brown speaking in the voice of Michael Bloom; later in the message he explains: Just kidding! It’s only me, Barrett Brown; I used to write that column for Intercept about comical prison stuff, and then later I got mad and quit, as is my custom.

cinquemb 8y ago

My opinion of the whole Intercept operation/Snowden affair: "…When their veil of secrecy is shredded and they can no longer rely on a phony cover story to misinform the public, they resort to admitting—sometimes even volunteering—some of the truth while still managing to withhold the key and damaging facts in the case. The public, however, is usually so intrigued by the new information that it never thinks to pursue the matter further."

aristophenes 8y ago

Can someone explain this with context? I am not informed enough about this to understand, I assume others are experiencing something similar.

wallace_f 8y ago
This article would be a lot better if it started with the introduction: TI decides to end funding for work on the Snowden archive to cut expenditures. Laura Poitras is very angry about this, here are her thoughts.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]