Mediastan Page #8

They have taken actions because they

they see it as in their interests to do this or that.

But how would you look at it if the same thing

were to happen to the New York Times?

If the New York Times were all of a sudden

stopped from getting funds...

and they would have their offices closed down.

You're painting a hypothetical, but I can't follow it.

You can paint a hypothetical where they are

in the exact same position as for example WikiLeaks.

The New York Times decides to publish everything that they get.

No, I mean...

...there's a very sharp distinction here

you have two actors who are in the business of

communicating with a broader public.

One actor made clear, the New York Times

and other publications

we are going to report on what we have

we want to do it responsibly

and we want to do it in a way that is respectful of...

...the danger that this might cause to specific individuals.

And the New York Times voluntarily withheld

certain documents and certain names

because they recognised as we did

that the pubblication of these documents

the publication of these names

would put real live human beings at risk.

[ Location:

New York,

USA ]

[ First day of Occupy Wall Street demonstrations ]

Whose street?

- Our steet!

Occupy Wall Street!

Occupy Wall Street!

The New York Post sent a very intrepid reporter down there

to sleep overnight!

You spent Thursday night in Zuccotti park?

- I did!

Live to tell about! What was it like?

It was a scary place

I mean Zuccotti Park right now is it's own country.

Listen, you're a tough Queens girl right?

You grew up in Queens, you're not afraid of this stuff.

You went down there. What surprised you the most

about what was going on in Zuccotti Park?

What surprised me the most about what's going on there

is that it's totally lawless.

Did you disguise yourself? Did you try to look like a protestor?

Were you going undercover?

You weren't advertising that you were with the Post, right?

When I spoke to people I told them that I was a Post reporter

so it was no secret.

And how did they recieve you?

Well... some people didn't really like

that I was a Post reporter to be honest.

What's very disturbing to hear though

you write from your article

"the threat of rape is very real here for men and women".

How did you sleep that night?

I didn't!

Too cold? Or too many characters?

Too many characters I think...

Candis Geovi from the Post, thank you very much.

Hi! How are you?

So like I said, once you start the interview

close the doors and don't come out.

It's General Assembly at the United Nations

and we have important people coming through.

[ BILL KELLER,

Editor "The New York Times" ]

The UN General Assembly opens this week

so there's a lot of presidents and foreign ministers

and some of them troop through here.

Really? Is that customary?

Yeah, it's pretty typical.

When they're in town, some of them invite themselves

and some of them we invite to

meet with the editorial writers and things.

And how does that usually work out?

They're usually pretty predictable

once in a while one of them makes news

but it's good to just give them a chance

to come over and air their views.

It kind of makes you into an Embassy...

We're the Embassy of the New York Times...

you may have discovered this yourself

foreign news organisations don't always get

the kind of access they would like to officials in Washington

if you want to ask the Military or the White House

to respond to classified information...

...it can be difficult if you're a representative

of a foreign news organisation.

I think that's a shame, but it's a reality

so I think they felt

we would be in a better position to

confront the administration with what we had

and solicit some kind of reaction from them

which turned out to be the case.

And your counterpart, was that PJ Crowley, or some other people?

The first couple of meetings

I think they went over and had them in person

and there were representatives of the State Department.

I assume the intelligence agencies we there.

I know that the CIA was represented.

I don't remember if the Military was there

because at that point it was mostly non-military matters.

After the first couple of conversations

they just had a daily phone call basically.

There was none of this 'everybody gathered in a room'.

They would say:

'We really think you should hold back this particular cable'

'and here is why'.

Then we would discuss it and decide whether to withhold it or not.

In many of the countries where we have been travelling

talking to either editors or politicians

there has been a concern that

these materials can have a destabilizing effect.

Did you consider the consequences of publishing them?

We considered it yeah, and we talked about it a lot.

Yemen is a good example of that

because the State Department's argument was that

these could be destabilising

but I kind of think it's not our job

to decide what is destabilising

or to preserve the stability of countries elsewhere.

Would you have acted differently had the material

been of such character that it would have

potentially destabilised your country?

It's hard for me to imagine what that would be...

You had an example a few years ago

with the warrantless wiretapping.

Yes.

Can you explain how you reasoned at that point in time

when you didn't publish the material?

When I didn't or when I did publish them?

When you didn't...

When I didn't publish them...

The concern wasn't whether it would destabilise our government

the concern was whether or not it would

be of significant value to people

who want to attack us.

Had it been your choice

and if you were the sole owners of this material...

you would not have published them?

The whole thing? No.

First of all because there are...

in the documents that we posted

we redacted many names of people

who would have been put in danger.

We have not studied all the documents

to know how many more people might be endangered

to post the whole thing I think would be irresponsible.

Let's say you would have redacted the names

of those who would have been in danger

and published it all on your site

would that be indictable?

Probably not...

but we had decided how to handle the material

regardless of the legal consequences

just on journalistic grounds...

...and we only wanted to publish...

Do you need the room?

You need me or the room?

I was going to send you a 'hero' gram

but then I heard you were in here man

[ ARTHUR SULTZBERGER JR.

Chairman "The New York Times Company" ]

That was fabulous!

Glad you liked it.

Oh sh*t yes!

It made the Drudge Report, so I'm getting a lot of traffic!

It's been a deep improvement in traffic this morning.

It's not the kind of traffic you necessarily want

because a lot of people use the word scum-bag.

It's a technical term!

We're talking about our favourite subject...

...WikiLeaks.

This is Arthur Sultzberger, he is the publisher.

Rate this script:0.0 / 0 votes