Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by n1 on Tuesday September 30 2014, @11:18PM   Printer-friendly
from the journalism,-but-not-as-we-know-it dept.

The Intercept reports:

A prominent national security reporter for the Los Angeles Times routinely submitted drafts and detailed summaries of his stories to CIA press handlers prior to publication, according to documents obtained by The Intercept.

Email exchanges between CIA public affairs officers and Ken Dilanian, now an Associated Press intelligence reporter who previously covered the CIA for the Times, show that Dilanian enjoyed a closely collaborative relationship with the agency, explicitly promising positive news coverage and sometimes sending the press office entire story drafts for review prior to publication. In at least one instance, the CIA’s reaction appears to have led to significant changes in the story that was eventually published in the Times.

“I’m working on a story about congressional oversight of drone strikes that can present a good opportunity for you guys,” Dilanian wrote in one email to a CIA press officer, explaining that what he intended to report would be “reassuring to the public” about CIA drone strikes.

[...] The emails also show that Dilanian shared his work with the CIA before it was published, and invited the agency to request changes. On Friday April 27, 2012, he emailed the press office a draft story that he and a colleague, David Cloud, were preparing. The subject line was “this is where we are headed,” and he asked if “you guys want to push back on any of this.”

It appears the agency did push back. On May 2, 2012, he emailed the CIA a new opening to the story with a subject line that asked, “does this look better?”

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by Lagg on Tuesday September 30 2014, @11:46PM

    by Lagg (105) on Tuesday September 30 2014, @11:46PM (#100180) Homepage Journal

    I hope he enjoys being the CIA's bitch because it'll be happening quite a bit more if people, especially journalists don't stop playing nice with them and other agencies.

    --
    http://lagg.me [lagg.me] 🗿
    • (Score: 3, Interesting) by Thexalon on Wednesday October 01 2014, @02:00AM

      by Thexalon (636) on Wednesday October 01 2014, @02:00AM (#100230)

      And groveling at the feet of the CIA doesn't always help. For example, the New York Times have been caught several times running all their political and national security stories by the administration of whoever is in the White House (yes, including George W Bush) before printing them, but they now have a reporter in jail because he included leaked information the national security establishment didn't want available to the public and the reporter in question won't cough up who leaked that info to him.

      --
      The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
      • (Score: 4, Informative) by hemocyanin on Wednesday October 01 2014, @06:10AM

        by hemocyanin (186) on Wednesday October 01 2014, @06:10AM (#100318) Journal

        That reporter failed to properly adhere to the propaganda model:

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda_model [wikipedia.org] (describing the carrot, the reporter you mention of course, is getting the stick):

        Editors and journalists who offend these powerful news sources, perhaps by questioning the veracity or bias of the furnished material, can be threatened with the denial of access to their media life-blood - fresh news.[3] Thus, the media become reluctant to run articles that will harm corporate interests that provide them with the resources that the media depend upon.

        This relationship also gives rise to a "moral division of labor", in which "officials have and give the facts" and "reporters merely get them". Journalists are then supposed to adopt an uncritical attitude that makes it possible for them to accept corporate values without experiencing cognitive dissonance.

        The modern reporter is merely a stenographer of official statements.

  • (Score: -1, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 30 2014, @11:46PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 30 2014, @11:46PM (#100181)

    I have noticed some bugs in SoylentNews but I can't figure out how to submit a bug report anonymously. GitHub keeps saying I have to log in. I ain't gonna use GitHub, 'cuz it ain't open source, and I'm not going to compromise my principles by using proprietary closed source software.

    Here are the bugs:

    1) http://www.soylentnews.com/ [soylentnews.com] shows a parked domain page instead of redirecting to http://www.soylentnews.org/ [soylentnews.org], like how http://soylentnews.com/ [soylentnews.com] redirects to http://soylentnews.org./ [soylentnews.org.]

    2) The site should always be served up using HTTPS.

    3) It takes too much effort to view all of the comments for a story. There needs to be a single button that will do the same as setting both dropdowns to -1 and clicking on the "Change" button.

    Keep up the good work, men and women! Unlike Slashdot, this site gets better over time. And unlike Pipedot, people actually use this site!

    • (Score: 2) by SlimmPickens on Wednesday October 01 2014, @12:24AM

      by SlimmPickens (1056) on Wednesday October 01 2014, @12:24AM (#100192)

      It takes too much effort to view all of the comments for a story. There needs to be a single button that will do the same as setting both dropdowns to -1 and clicking on the "Change" button.

      You may be interested in "Television"

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @01:20AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @01:20AM (#100210)

        Huh?

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @01:44AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @01:44AM (#100215)

        Would be nice to have a pure by date option too so tha all comments are sorted by date not by thread at all

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @01:46AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @01:46AM (#100218)

          > Would be nice to have a pure by date option too so tha all comments are sorted by date not by thread at all

          We already have that, it is "newest first (ignore threads)"

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @02:02AM

            by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @02:02AM (#100231)

            We know it can be done that way. But there should be a faster way of accessing it. That's why a separate button is needed. Then it's just one click, instead of two.

    • (Score: 2) by Tork on Wednesday October 01 2014, @01:11AM

      by Tork (3914) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday October 01 2014, @01:11AM (#100207)

      I ain't gonna use GitHub, 'cuz it ain't open source, and I'm not going to compromise my principles by using proprietary closed source software.

      That's an awfully restrictive principle you have there. I mean you're compromising the stability of a community that heavily supports the principle you're trying not to compromise.

      3) It takes too much effort to view all of the comments for a story. There needs to be a single button that will do the same as setting both dropdowns to -1 and clicking on the "Change" button.

      Register an account.

      --
      🏳️‍🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️‍🌈
      • (Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @01:23AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @01:23AM (#100212)

        I think the GP is right. Having to use GitHub to log bugs is itself a bug. And an account shouldn't be needed to view all of a submission's comments. This isn't reddit or HN or one of the other crap sites like that. Anonymity, or not needing an account, is one of the best things about /. and this site. So it should be easy to do basic things like logging bugs and views all comments without needing an account.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @01:38AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @01:38AM (#100214)

          Well said.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @01:48AM

            by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @01:48AM (#100220)
            Oh, neat! If I post Anonymously it looks like lots of people share my opinion!
            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @01:51AM

              by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @01:51AM (#100223)
              Well said.
              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @02:04AM

                by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @02:04AM (#100233)

                Tork, why are you replying to yourself as an Anonymous Coward?

                • (Score: 2) by Tork on Wednesday October 01 2014, @02:53AM

                  by Tork (3914) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday October 01 2014, @02:53AM (#100254)
                  Woosh.
                  --
                  🏳️‍🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️‍🌈
        • (Score: 2) by Tork on Wednesday October 01 2014, @01:46AM

          by Tork (3914) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday October 01 2014, @01:46AM (#100217)

          Having to use GitHub to log bugs is itself a bug.

          No, it isn't, it's just not your preference.

          And an account shouldn't be needed to view all of a submission's comments.

          You don't need an account to view all of the submission's comments.

          Anonymity, or not needing an account, is one of the best things about /. and this site.

          You have it.

          --
          🏳️‍🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️‍🌈
          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @01:57AM

            by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @01:57AM (#100227)

            Nope, it's not a matter of preference. If an account is needed just to file a bug report, then that's broken functionality, which means it's a bug that needs to be fixed. And if functionality that isn't account-specific is only available to users with an account, that's also a bug, and it needs to be fixed. Only account-specific functionality like changing a password should be available to users with accounts. Otherwise it should be available to everyone.

            • (Score: 2) by Tork on Wednesday October 01 2014, @02:05AM

              by Tork (3914) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday October 01 2014, @02:05AM (#100234)

              Nope, it's not a matter of preference. If an account is needed just to file a bug report, then that's broken functionality, which means it's a bug that needs to be fixed.

              No, it isn't. It's working as designed, that is not a bug. What you want is a preference.

              And if functionality that isn't account-specific is only available to users with an account, that's also a bug, and it needs to be fixed.

              You have all the functionality without having an account. If you're lumping GitHub in that complaint then you're on the wrong site to bitch about that.

              --
              🏳️‍🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️‍🌈
              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @02:10AM

                by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @02:10AM (#100236)

                If that's how it's designed, then it's broken. An account should never be needed to log a bug report or perform any other general action. If an account is needed, even by design, then it's a bug, and that bug should be fixed by removing the need for an account.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @01:48AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @01:48AM (#100221)

          > So it should be easy to do basic things like logging bugs and views all comments without needing an account.

          I stopped logging in a few months ago, I do not find clicking 3 buttons an inconvenience.
          But if it bothers you, go get a firefox add-on like stylish or redirector and set them up to rewrite the page the way you like it by default.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @01:55AM

            by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @01:55AM (#100225)

            If somebody has to script their browser in order to add basic functionality to a website, then the functionality should be part of the website itself.

            • (Score: 2) by Tork on Wednesday October 01 2014, @01:56AM

              by Tork (3914) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday October 01 2014, @01:56AM (#100226)
              It is there, you've decided you don't want to use it.
              --
              🏳️‍🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️‍🌈
              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @01:59AM

                by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @01:59AM (#100229)

                Nope, it doesn't exist if an account is needed to use it. Needing an account to use basic functionality is always a bug.

                • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @02:09AM

                  by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @02:09AM (#100235)
                  You do not need an account. Read the complaint again, dipshit.
                  • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @02:12AM

                    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @02:12AM (#100238)

                    You read it again, Tork. You're the one misunderstanding this. It shouldn't take 3 clicks to view all of the comments under a submission, regardless of whether one does or doesn't have an account. There should be one button, and clicking it shows all of the comments. It's a bug that this functionality doesn't exist, and it should be fixed.

                    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @02:14AM

                      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @02:14AM (#100239)
                      I want a button that only shows +4 comments. Is that a bug, too?
                      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @02:18AM

                        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @02:18AM (#100241)

                        Yes. If it takes more than one click to do something, then it's a bug and it should be fixed.

                        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @02:20AM

                          by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @02:20AM (#100243)
                          So you think of all the pulldowns should be expanded to a list of buttons, correct?
                          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @02:41AM

                            by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @02:41AM (#100248)

                            Potentially. I would only ever use the one to view all of the comments, including those at -1, but if others would find the other buttons useful then I think they should be added, too.

                            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @02:45AM

                              by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @02:45AM (#100252)
                              So... you admit then that it's a matter of preference. Smooth.
                              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @02:59AM

                                by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @02:59AM (#100255)

                                No, it's not a matter of preference. There's no contradiction here, Tork, as much as you want there to be. These are bugs that should be fixed. I know you're just trying to argue against this for the sake of arguing. But the fact is that these are bugs, and they should be fixed.

                                • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @03:07AM

                                  by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @03:07AM (#100258)

                                  No, it's not a matter of preference. There's no contradiction here...

                                  Potentially. I would only ever use the one to view all of the comments, including those at -1, but if others would find the other buttons useful then I think they should be added, too.

                                  That is an expression of preference. You cannot blame ME for what YOU said. The pull-down is a perfectly sane choice for a scenario like that. You just want the world to bend to your whims.

                                  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @03:19AM

                                    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @03:19AM (#100264)

                                    Like I said, Tork, it's obviously not a matter of preference. You keep deluding yourself into thinking it is, but it obviously isn't. There are bugs present, and they need to be fixed. It's just that simple.

                                    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @03:26AM

                                      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @03:26AM (#100274)
                                      Okay. Explain how expanding a pulldown into individual buttons so you can have the particular button you want is a bug and not a preference.
                                      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @10:20AM

                                        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @10:20AM (#100376)

                                        It's a bug because 3 clicks are needed with the dropdowns. With a button, only 1 click is needed. It's a matter of efficiency, not preference. I don't know why you've got such a thick, stiff, raging hard-on for preferences. We're talking about bugs that impact efficiency here.

                                        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @05:58PM

                                          by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @05:58PM (#100566)
                                          Why is it more 'efficient' to have an extra >14 buttons on every page?
                                    • (Score: 1) by Horse With Stripes on Wednesday October 01 2014, @03:36AM

                                      by Horse With Stripes (577) on Wednesday October 01 2014, @03:36AM (#100278)

                                      There are bugs present, and they need to be fixed. It's just that simple.

                                      Thank you for your observations and concerns. Unfortunately a thread is not the correct place to report a bug. You can find information on reporting bugs by logging into your account, clicking on your 'Info' link, scrolling down to the FAQ4Me section and clicking on the "How to improve your community through participation" link.

                                      There are a lot of great links strewn about your account settings and the best part about them is that none of them are buttons so you never have to click on more than one button. Of course, if you prefer buttons to links you can make that request at GitHub simply by registering an account and filling out a few change request & enhancement forms. Or you could check out a code module, add the changes yourself, and click the "commit changes" button.

                                      Speaking of making code changes on the site, I recently submitted a code change for a GTFO button, but it requires a confirmation click so you probably wouldn't like it.

                                      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @10:22AM

                                        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @10:22AM (#100377)

                                        Did you not read anything in this thread of discussion? The fact that the other AC has to use github to log the bug, which requires an account, is of and in itself a bug! Yes, that's right, the bug reporting system is riddled with bugs that prevent it from being used to report bugs! Having to create an account of any sort to log a bug is a bug! It's a bug so severe that it prevents other bugs from being logged! So it's totally fine to post a comment here to point out that the bug system is broken. That's really the only option!

                        • (Score: 1) by Horse With Stripes on Wednesday October 01 2014, @03:23AM

                          by Horse With Stripes (577) on Wednesday October 01 2014, @03:23AM (#100268)

                          Yes. If it takes more than one click to do something, then it's a bug and it should be fixed.

                          That's easy to fix. Go find a one-click installer for a site like this and, well, click it. I think there's one on GitHub, but you'll need to register an account to get to it.

                          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @03:26AM

                            by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @03:26AM (#100273)

                            You have to register an account to get it? That's a bug. Any time an account is needed, it's probably a bug.

                            • (Score: 1) by Horse With Stripes on Wednesday October 01 2014, @03:41AM

                              by Horse With Stripes (577) on Wednesday October 01 2014, @03:41AM (#100281)

                              Hmm ... I see ... you should probably register that bug so they can fix it. The best way to do that is to head on over to GitHub.

                              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @10:27AM

                                by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @10:27AM (#100379)

                                The AC can't do that because github is a piece of broken crap and requires an account. Didn't you read any of the discussion here? That bug needs to be fixed before it can be used to log any of these bugs!

                                • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @06:01PM

                                  by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @06:01PM (#100567)
                                  That isn't the reason he said he wouldn't use it. Maybe you should work on your own reading comprehension before you tangle up with others about it.
                                  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @10:01PM

                                    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @10:01PM (#100686)

                                    Try again, Tork. You're the one who didn't read the comment you replied to.

                                    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @10:55PM

                                      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @10:55PM (#100728)
                                      Actually he said it was because he was overly zealous about using OSS.
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @10:25AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @10:25AM (#100378)
      It's not a bug and if it annoys nutjob ACs like you, I consider it a feature.
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by RedBear on Wednesday October 01 2014, @12:02AM

    by RedBear (1734) on Wednesday October 01 2014, @12:02AM (#100186)

    No need for a Ministry of Truth when you have willingly kowtowing douchebag traitorous "journalists" like this to do your pro-government truthifying for free. Hope he's proud of himself.

    --
    ¯\_ʕ◔.◔ʔ_/¯ LOL. I dunno. I'm just a bear.
    ... Peace out. Got bear stuff to do. 彡ʕ⌐■.■ʔ
    • (Score: 1) by Buck Feta on Wednesday October 01 2014, @01:44AM

      by Buck Feta (958) on Wednesday October 01 2014, @01:44AM (#100216) Journal

      I would hire the guy... for a job moving liquefied pig shit between barns one mouthful at a time.

      --
      - fractious political commentary goes here -
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by black6host on Wednesday October 01 2014, @12:27AM

    by black6host (3827) on Wednesday October 01 2014, @12:27AM (#100193) Journal

    The sad thing is that most people will just say they (both journalists and the CIA) are just doing their jobs to keep us safe. This is such a small fish compared to, for example, WikiLeaks and Snowden. Sure, they got the coverage, but I would expect a lot more outrage over what they revealed than how it was done. Alas, that doesn't seem to be the case.

    It just amazes me how our partners overseas all cried foul when it was found out we were monitoring them. You can bet your last dollar they were doing the same thing. It was simply a game of finding the means of espionage, removing it, and looking for the next one.

    Of course we, the citizens of the USA, were made to look like the bad guys. That's only because we got caught. But everyone has their hand in that cookie jar.

    What we are told is sooooo far from the truth that I don't know if any one person knows the truth anymore. Much less entire organizations. And yet we, Joe Sixpack if you will, are presented with snippets of it and could dig much deeper if we wanted to. It seems we just don't care. Not as long as I have gas for my truck and beer for my belly. (Not all, obviously I, and many others, care very much.)

    • (Score: 4, Insightful) by kaszz on Wednesday October 01 2014, @12:43AM

      by kaszz (4211) on Wednesday October 01 2014, @12:43AM (#100198) Journal

      The difference being that USA has global reach and is the #1 player and thus can make policy for other countries. And thus will be expected to behave (or suffer the fallout).

      But shortly China will likely tell USA how it gets to run its business.

    • (Score: 5, Insightful) by hemocyanin on Wednesday October 01 2014, @05:54AM

      by hemocyanin (186) on Wednesday October 01 2014, @05:54AM (#100309) Journal

      The sad thing is that most people will just say they (both journalists and the CIA) are just doing their jobs to keep us safe.

      The really sad thing is that shows a fundamental lack of understanding between the definitions of "journalism" (thought so important it got the First Amendment) and propaganda. We have vanishingly few journalistic entities in America, and a whole slew of propagandists.

      Of course we, the citizens of the USA, were made to look like the bad guys. That's only because we got caught. But everyone has their hand in that cookie jar.

      Perhaps the US Federal government isn't the _only_ bad guy in the world, but there is absolutely no question it is one of the bad guys.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @06:53PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @06:53PM (#100589)

        Oh, I know we are the bad guy. We're just not the *only* one.....

  • (Score: 2) by SlimmPickens on Wednesday October 01 2014, @12:39AM

    by SlimmPickens (1056) on Wednesday October 01 2014, @12:39AM (#100196)

    We learned this when MAINWAY was disclosed back in 2006. I don't have time to find a reference right now, but there's a lengthy article somewhere that describes the the lead-up to the disclosure. There was A LOT of pressure from the CIA and it was very clear that if security reporters don't warn them first and give them the opportunity to explain themselves (make some shit up) they will make your life very difficult.

    It may well be that Ken Dilanian can report MORE by keeping them happy.

    • (Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Wednesday October 01 2014, @05:56AM

      by hemocyanin (186) on Wednesday October 01 2014, @05:56AM (#100312) Journal

      -1 naive.

      Reports do this bootlicking thing because they like the junkets, the access, being part of the club, money -- this propagandist didn't kowtow out of some sense of higher ethics.

    • (Score: 2) by sjames on Wednesday October 01 2014, @06:53AM

      by sjames (2882) on Wednesday October 01 2014, @06:53AM (#100329) Journal

      No amount of misinformation is worth a single grain of truth.

      • (Score: 2) by SlimmPickens on Wednesday October 01 2014, @08:11AM

        by SlimmPickens (1056) on Wednesday October 01 2014, @08:11AM (#100351)

        I agree with the sentiment, but it's a bit more complex than that. It's obvious that a journalist has more room to move if the agencies think you're playing ball. with them

        • (Score: 2) by sjames on Wednesday October 01 2014, @04:38PM

          by sjames (2882) on Wednesday October 01 2014, @04:38PM (#100531) Journal

          The problem is that eventually they have to 'spring the trap' or the role they play becomes the reality.

  • (Score: 2) by kaszz on Wednesday October 01 2014, @12:53AM

    by kaszz (4211) on Wednesday October 01 2014, @12:53AM (#100201) Journal

    Perhaps this will make people with a decent clue to drop mainstream media. They are just filled with grey mouses that will go along with the party line. Not offending anyone (important) is the second priority and the first is profit.

    By now you perhaps also figured that the curriculum in school is also "corrected" in the same way. Just a provocation, how do you know that what you learned is really true? or what you were told are the things that matter?

  • (Score: 2) by mendax on Wednesday October 01 2014, @02:11AM

    by mendax (2840) on Wednesday October 01 2014, @02:11AM (#100237)

    What this reporter has done is a "standard practice" in the news media, and it's a very wise practice.

    They do it for a couple of reasons. First, it gives The Company an opportunity to point out how release of this information will compromise national security (and perhaps explain without breaking the law what is at stake). Second, it gives them an opportunity to bring to the attention of the reporter any errors in the article. It gives the reporter an opportunity to check with other sources. The CIA not approving of the story does not mean that reporter or the newspaper cannot publish the story, but it can keep them out of trouble. There is nothing worse than a newspaper or other news organization reporting on a story and then having to retract it because it's false. Look what happened to Dan Rather a decade ago, and it almost sank Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein at the Washington Post when they screwed up on a story related to the Watergate break-in and published a story that was incorrect because they misinterpreted a source.

    I don't know the motivation of this reporter for doing what the article says he's doing, but if he's indeed guilty of this the AP really ought to fire him. There is no room for blind patriotism, politics, or an intelligence agent, professional or otherwise, in journalism. He can go work for Fox News if they'd be stupid enough to hire him.

    --
    It's really quite a simple choice: Life, Death, or Los Angeles.
    • (Score: 5, Insightful) by hemocyanin on Wednesday October 01 2014, @06:00AM

      by hemocyanin (186) on Wednesday October 01 2014, @06:00AM (#100316) Journal

      No -- this is just being a propagandist. It would be one thing if the reporter said "whistleblower says A", "CIA says Z" -- it's a whole other thing when he lets the CIA edit the stories. There's a quid-pro-quo that goes on here: if the reporter is friendly to the government, they feed him/her little tidbits, allow access, help him make money and have fun while doing it. It's simple bribery in exchange for propaganda. To think that is "smart" makes sense only if you are a member of the ruling class.

  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Phoenix666 on Wednesday October 01 2014, @02:18AM

    by Phoenix666 (552) on Wednesday October 01 2014, @02:18AM (#100242) Journal

    One overarching lesson I'm drawing from all of this is that without constant public oversight and engagement, there is no democracy. Blogs and citizen journalism are an important step in wresting the public discourse away from the corporate mass media and bringing useful, actionable information to the public again. Default encryption and apps like FireChat are another important step, on the systems level. Each one of us can play an important part in either sphere, or in still others. But each of us must play a part. The status quo has become so arrogant, lazy, and corrupt in our absence that it will bring all of us down if we don't correct it.

    --
    Washington DC delenda est.
  • (Score: 4, Funny) by wonkey_monkey on Wednesday October 01 2014, @07:26AM

    by wonkey_monkey (279) on Wednesday October 01 2014, @07:26AM (#100334) Homepage

    The story's dated six months ago. I hope SN didn't have to await CIA approval before running with it.

    --
    systemd is Roko's Basilisk
    • (Score: 2) by JNCF on Wednesday October 01 2014, @03:00PM

      by JNCF (4317) on Wednesday October 01 2014, @03:00PM (#100487) Journal

      The story's dated six months ago. I hope SN didn't have to await CIA approval before running with it.

      We Americans do things oddly sometimes. One example is, we list our dates in the format month/day/year. So "09/04/2014" is a little less than a month ago, in Amerispeak. Strange, I know.

      • (Score: 2) by wonkey_monkey on Wednesday October 01 2014, @03:24PM

        by wonkey_monkey (279) on Wednesday October 01 2014, @03:24PM (#100495) Homepage

        Oh yeah. Oh well, at least I was only going for "Funny" and not "Insightful."

        --
        systemd is Roko's Basilisk
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @09:04AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 01 2014, @09:04AM (#100364)

    News reports write the government.