4 ms·

Do you believe there is any value in a nation classifying information under different security clearances? If so, should there be any punishment for taking some

by umvi 6y ago

Do you believe there is any value in a nation classifying information under different security clearances? If so, should there be any punishment for taking something classified and putting it into public domain?

monadic3 6y ago
Surely this depends on the contents of the information. I refuse to carte blanche trust a government to decide secrecy when every indication is that this is used to mislead citizens. This emphatically is true for both governments in question.
nradov 6y ago
In the US it is perfectly legal for journalists to distribute classified information, as long as they don't hold a security clearance themselves. I think this strikes the right balance. Note that a journalist can still be prosecuted for breaking other laws like theft, computer abuse, or conspiracy if they use illegal means to obtain the information. But that's separate from publishing the information once they have it.
- free_rms 6y ago
  But your caveats mean that, in practice, they can come after anyone who actually came into contact with the material unless it was dead-dropped to them without their knowledge, and even then, maybe they were 'encouraging' it. See Julian Assange. What's his case hinge on again, "conspiracy to commit computer intrusion"? Any amount of working with a source would be such a conspiracy.
- ashtonkem 6y ago
  That's not quite right. Journalists can publish classified information as long as they don't encourage or help with the original leak. So distributing classified info that someone mailed you is fine, but telling someone what info to go and get for you is not fine (legally speaking).
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - maxerickson 6y ago
    Isn't that covered by conspiracy (mentioned in GP)?
    - ashtonkem 6y ago
      Yes; I must have overlooked that. My mistake.
  - warent 6y ago
    Wouldn't that mean Julian Assange is innocent?
    - meragrin 6y ago
      Aren't they claiming Assange participated in some way? Either by providing help or suggesting what to get?
    - ashtonkem 6y ago
      The government is alleging that he helped & encouraged the leakers.
- vmception 6y ago
  For anyone passing by let me sum up the whole discussion: I respect the process by which journalists are prosecuted in one country I didn't even look into the laws in this other country I already didn’t respect, journalists there are prosecuted
xnyan 6y ago
Do you believe that governments ever abuse classification power? If so, should there be any circumstances where classified material can be shared in the public domain?
closeparen 6y ago
It is one thing to enforce the oaths that government employees voluntarily swear while onboarding to their positions of trust. Quite another when regular citizens / journalists are pressed into service to protect the state from embarrassment.
roenxi 6y ago
> ...should there be any punishment for taking something classified and putting it into public domain... "something" is a word that goes to a core issues of the whole thing. For democracy to function, people need to be able to argue that things are bad ideas. Say the military classifies a video because it would undermine public support for a war. There should be no punishment for leaking that, as it is information that is relevant to the public - if it would sway their decision making, then it shouldn't be kept from them. Say the military classifies troop deployments that are irrelevant to all public decision making - leaking that should be punishable. So to decide if something is punishable or not, we have to deal with a specific issue and make a judgement on whether that specific issue could reasonably have influenced public decision making.
belorn 6y ago
I once looked into the Swedish law back a decade or so ago when Wikileaks did their first big publication. As it happened there were a few court case back during the cold war where classified military information were published by news paper and the paper ended up in court. Recalling what I read, they made a few tests in order to confirm their conclusion. 1: Did the leaked information exist publicly before the publication. It make no sense to continue demand legal protection for information which is already public. 2: Did the leaked information cause any harm by being leaked. If it can not be demonstrated to have caused harm then the information should not have been classified from the start and thus do not deserve legal protection. 3: Was publicizing the information in the public interests? This has made prosecuting news papers for publicizing classified information almost impossible.
- umvi 6y ago
  Seems like it would be hard to quantify number 2, depending on how your define "harm". Foreign relations might be harmed (which might indirectly lead to deaths down the road), even if nobody was directly killed or injured because of the leak.
  - belorn 6y ago
    It would indeed be very hard. It have not stopped government from continuing classifying documents, and media publisher could in theory be found guilty, but the bar is set very high, The first test is also much harder that one might think. Open source intelligence tend to have a lot of information if one know what to look for. Similar, small news paper can often be early in publishing information before more mainstream publishers.
DevKoala 6y ago
Is this classification facilitating the harm of innocent individuals?
j16sdiz 6y ago
In China, documents can be re-classified as secret after they have been released.

by umvi 6y ago

monadic3 6y ago

Surely this depends on the contents of the information. I refuse to carte blanche trust a government to decide secrecy when every indication is that this is used to mislead citizens. This emphatically is true for both governments in question.

nradov 6y ago

In the US it is perfectly legal for journalists to distribute classified information, as long as they don't hold a security clearance themselves. I think this strikes the right balance. Note that a journalist can still be prosecuted for breaking other laws like theft, computer abuse, or conspiracy if they use illegal means to obtain the information. But that's separate from publishing the information once they have it.

free_rms 6y ago
But your caveats mean that, in practice, they can come after anyone who actually came into contact with the material unless it was dead-dropped to them without their knowledge, and even then, maybe they were 'encouraging' it. See Julian Assange. What's his case hinge on again, "conspiracy to commit computer intrusion"? Any amount of working with a source would be such a conspiracy.
ashtonkem 6y ago
That's not quite right. Journalists can publish classified information as long as they don't encourage or help with the original leak. So distributing classified info that someone mailed you is fine, but telling someone what info to go and get for you is not fine (legally speaking).
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- maxerickson 6y ago
  Isn't that covered by conspiracy (mentioned in GP)?
  - ashtonkem 6y ago
    Yes; I must have overlooked that. My mistake.
- warent 6y ago
  Wouldn't that mean Julian Assange is innocent?
  - meragrin 6y ago
    Aren't they claiming Assange participated in some way? Either by providing help or suggesting what to get?
  - ashtonkem 6y ago
    The government is alleging that he helped & encouraged the leakers.
vmception 6y ago
For anyone passing by let me sum up the whole discussion: I respect the process by which journalists are prosecuted in one country I didn't even look into the laws in this other country I already didn’t respect, journalists there are prosecuted

xnyan 6y ago

Do you believe that governments ever abuse classification power? If so, should there be any circumstances where classified material can be shared in the public domain?

closeparen 6y ago

It is one thing to enforce the oaths that government employees voluntarily swear while onboarding to their positions of trust. Quite another when regular citizens / journalists are pressed into service to protect the state from embarrassment.

roenxi 6y ago

> ...should there be any punishment for taking something classified and putting it into public domain... "something" is a word that goes to a core issues of the whole thing. For democracy to function, people need to be able to argue that things are bad ideas. Say the military classifies a video because it would undermine public support for a war. There should be no punishment for leaking that, as it is information that is relevant to the public - if it would sway their decision making, then it shouldn't be kept from them. Say the military classifies troop deployments that are irrelevant to all public decision making - leaking that should be punishable. So to decide if something is punishable or not, we have to deal with a specific issue and make a judgement on whether that specific issue could reasonably have influenced public decision making.

belorn 6y ago

I once looked into the Swedish law back a decade or so ago when Wikileaks did their first big publication. As it happened there were a few court case back during the cold war where classified military information were published by news paper and the paper ended up in court. Recalling what I read, they made a few tests in order to confirm their conclusion. 1: Did the leaked information exist publicly before the publication. It make no sense to continue demand legal protection for information which is already public. 2: Did the leaked information cause any harm by being leaked. If it can not be demonstrated to have caused harm then the information should not have been classified from the start and thus do not deserve legal protection. 3: Was publicizing the information in the public interests? This has made prosecuting news papers for publicizing classified information almost impossible.

umvi 6y ago
Seems like it would be hard to quantify number 2, depending on how your define "harm". Foreign relations might be harmed (which might indirectly lead to deaths down the road), even if nobody was directly killed or injured because of the leak.
- belorn 6y ago
  It would indeed be very hard. It have not stopped government from continuing classifying documents, and media publisher could in theory be found guilty, but the bar is set very high, The first test is also much harder that one might think. Open source intelligence tend to have a lot of information if one know what to look for. Similar, small news paper can often be early in publishing information before more mainstream publishers.

DevKoala 6y ago

Is this classification facilitating the harm of innocent individuals?

j16sdiz 6y ago

In China, documents can be re-classified as secret after they have been released.