Slashdot Mirror


The Intercept Shuts Down Access To Snowden Trove (thedailybeast.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Daily Beast: First Look Media announced Wednesday that it was shutting down access to whistleblower Edward Snowden's massive trove of leaked National Security Agency documents. Over the past several years, The Intercept, which is owned by First Look Media, has maintained a research team to handle the large number of documents provided by Snowden to Intercept journalists Laura Poitras and Glenn Greenwald. But in an email to staff Wednesday evening, First Look CEO Michael Bloom said that as other major news outlets had "ceased reporting on it years ago," The Intercept had decided to "focus on other editorial priorities" after expending five years combing through the archive. "The Intercept is proud of its reporting on the Snowden archive, and we are thankful to Laura Poitras and Glenn Greenwald for making it available to us," Bloom wrote. He added: "It is our hope that Glenn and Laura are able to find a new partner -- such as an academic institution or research facility -- that will continue to report on and publish the documents in the archive consistent with the public interest." Poitras reprimanded First Look Media for its decision to shut down its archives, and lay off 4 percent of its staff who had maintained them. "This decision and the way it was handled would be a disservice to our source, the risks we've all taken, and most importantly, to the public for whom Edward Snowden blew the whistle," she wrote.

"Late Thursday evening, Greenwald tweeted that both he and Poitras had full copies of the archives, and had been searching for a partner to continue research," reports The Daily Beast.

5 of 67 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Bad News for Snowden!!! by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Russia is not under much pressure to kick him out.

    America is really not that interested in putting him on trial. A trial would be an embarrassing spectacle, and a lot of official misconduct and incompetence would be publicized.

    The status quo is better for everyone.

  2. Not profitable. by Dan+East · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Let's be real. The Intercept and First Look Media didn't do this for The Greater Good. They got publicity and advertising revenue for being gatekeeper of this information and first to break the stories. "major news outlets had ceased reporting on it years ago" means "no longer profitable". So why should they be paying people to dredge through it when they aren't producing juicy bits any more? The two "journalists" whose job was to find stuff in top security documents that were illegally leaked in the hopes of bringing in web traffic shouldn't be the least bit surprised that their "research" positions have come to an end.

    --
    Better known as 318230.
  3. Re:The leak risk keeps going up. by AmiMoJo · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'd assume that other intelligence agencies already stole them from the NSA long before Snowden did, and these journalists probably have better opsec on their copies.

    Anyway, they should just throw a .torrent of it on The Pirate Bay at this point.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  4. Re:Funny thing about Snowden by eaglesrule · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's funny how right-wingers can't imagine that someone might actually take their oath to uphold and defend the constitution seriously, and reveal information that is beneficial to the public interest. A vow to protect against enemies, both foreign and domestic, which does involve blind obedience to those currently in power.

    It's incredible to assume that Snowden would even have a chance to see the inside of a courtroom. Not when there is an example to be made.

  5. Re:Bad News for Snowden!!! by Livius · · Score: 1, Insightful

    A trial was never the goal. He would have been given a military show trial if not assassinated outright.