4 ms·

Interesting that Manning tried to contact the Washington Post, but got blown off... Tried the NYTimes, and they didn't return his call. That may say something a

Interesting that Manning tried to contact the Washington Post, but got blown off... Tried the NYTimes, and they didn't return his call. That may say something about the media, but I'm more curious if the reaction by the US government and other officials to the leaks would have been the same if those papers had published the material, instead of Wikileaks?

safeaim 14y ago
It's probably not that easy getting through the big tip inbox of such papers. Especially if you are not identifying yourself as a high-level official.
saraid216 14y ago
To follow on from safeaim, I'd challenge you to get in contact with a reporter from either newspaper yourself. How would you go about it?
- breakall 14y ago
  Be famous, rich, powerful, or all of the above? Snark aside, I've occasionally exchanged brief emails with folks at newspapers -- an op/ed writer who wrote a particular column I liked, for example. With enough persistence, I think I could get through. If I really ran into a brick wall at the Post or the Times, I'd settle for the editor of a mid-size city paper.
OGinparadise 14y ago
but I'm more curious if the reaction by the US government and other officials to the leaks would have been the same if those papers had published the material, instead of Wikileaks? Manning would have still been fried, but then NYT would not have released all of them wholesale. Some things just need to be kept secret but Wikileaks released them (lack of manpower was one issue)
- jellicle 14y ago
  Sigh. Actually, everything released in the first large dump of Manning's stuff was vetted by.... wait for it... the New York Times. Which newspaper, along with the Guardian and Der Spiegel, broke the story on July 25, 2010. How quickly we forget. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghan_War_documents_leak http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghan_War_documents_leak
  - mpyne 14y ago
    Doesn't your Wiki link specifically mention that the media organizations did not release them wholesale? "The Times has taken care not to publish information that would harm national security interests." Seems pretty straightforward. "Vetted by" just means that the NYT had access to it beforehand, but they didn't publish it all, WikiLeaks did.

safeaim 14y ago

It's probably not that easy getting through the big tip inbox of such papers. Especially if you are not identifying yourself as a high-level official.

saraid216 14y ago

To follow on from safeaim, I'd challenge you to get in contact with a reporter from either newspaper yourself. How would you go about it?

breakall 14y ago
Be famous, rich, powerful, or all of the above? Snark aside, I've occasionally exchanged brief emails with folks at newspapers -- an op/ed writer who wrote a particular column I liked, for example. With enough persistence, I think I could get through. If I really ran into a brick wall at the Post or the Times, I'd settle for the editor of a mid-size city paper.

OGinparadise 14y ago

but I'm more curious if the reaction by the US government and other officials to the leaks would have been the same if those papers had published the material, instead of Wikileaks? Manning would have still been fried, but then NYT would not have released all of them wholesale. Some things just need to be kept secret but Wikileaks released them (lack of manpower was one issue)

jellicle 14y ago
Sigh. Actually, everything released in the first large dump of Manning's stuff was vetted by.... wait for it... the New York Times. Which newspaper, along with the Guardian and Der Spiegel, broke the story on July 25, 2010. How quickly we forget. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghan_War_documents_leak http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghan_War_documents_leak
- mpyne 14y ago
  Doesn't your Wiki link specifically mention that the media organizations did not release them wholesale? "The Times has taken care not to publish information that would harm national security interests." Seems pretty straightforward. "Vetted by" just means that the NYT had access to it beforehand, but they didn't publish it all, WikiLeaks did.