Slashdot Mirror


NY Times Considers Creating a WikiLeaks Type Site

eko3 writes "The New York Times is considering options to create an in-house submission system that could make it easier for would-be leakers to provide large files to the paper. From the article: 'Executive editor Bill Keller told The Cutline that he couldn't go into details, "especially since nothing is nailed down." But when asked if he could envision a system like Al Jazeera's Transparency Unit, Keller said the paper has been "looking at something along those lines."'"

3 of 114 comments (clear)

  1. What this really is by Sonny+Yatsen · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is the New York Times hoping to get a scoop for free so they can increase readership without actually doing any real investigative journalism for themselves.

    --
    My postings are informational and does not constitute legal advice. Act on it at your risk.
  2. They won't have the guts to do it right by elrous0 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The NY Times *may* have once had some real balls, back in the Vietnam/Watergate days. People used to really believe in them (and the press in general) back in those days too. Anyone remember the scene at the end of Firestarter where the guy takes the girl to the New York Times, knowing it's one of the few places she can tell her story that's safe from the government? Pretty typical attitude back in the "All the President's Men" era, when reporters regularly stood up to the government (or at least were perceived to).

    But today they certainly don't have the guts to do it right. They will insist on editorial control of what gets actually posted, and once submitters see their stuff disappearing into a black hole (because the Times doesn't have the guts to publish anything that might offend their advertisers or subscribers, or *really* bring the government down on them), they'll go back to Wikileaks or other sites. No one wants to man-up and blow the whistle, only to have the NY Times kill their voice just as surely as the government would.

    People don't believe in the press anymore. They've seen too many instances (like the second Iraq War) where the press served as little more than a cheerleader for the government, for big business, for nationalism, etc. No one still believes that The New York Times will be (or even could be) as free as Wikileaks.

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
  3. Watch out for those chicks in the bar ... by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I hope that "Executive editor Bill Keller" has the common sense to restrain himself, when suddenly, after his LeakSite is online, chicks start trying to hit on him in bars. Otherwise, he can play cards with Julian Assange behind bars.

    Assassinating the publishers of leaks is a dirty business. Assassinating their characters is a better, cleaner option.

    --
    Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!