Author of That Horrible Snowden Article Has Even Worse CNN Interview

It seems, following an interview on CNN, the NY Times "reporter", Tom Harper, that wrote the story on Russia and China cracking the encrypted Snowden files, has no idea if it is true or not. A few key Q/A's are precious:

CNN: How do senior officials at No. 10 Downing Street know these files were breached?
HARPER: Well, uh, I don’t know, to be honest with you, George. All we know is that this is effectively the official position of the British government…

CNN: Your article asserts that it is not clear if the files were hacked or if Snowden gave these files over when he was in Hong Kong and Russia. So which is it?
HARPER: Well, again, sorry to just repeat myself, George, but we don’t know so we haven’t written that in the paper. Um, you know, it could be, it could be another scenario. When you’re dealing with the world of intelligence there are so many unknowns and so many possibilities, it’s difficult to state anything with certainty…


Story

So, seems he was only parroting the British party line. Published what they told him to publish. Didn't ask for confirmation/proof of the claims. Didn't do any journalistic investigations at all. And this is a professional hired by the New York Times?!?!?

So here it is, proof of the MSM being mere shills and mouthpieces for the government entities, an where the news media has headed. Is it any wonder why these places hire complete morons and those that don't ask questions.


Who is surprised here?
Who feels vindicated that all the outlets that took this story and ran with it, without doing any of their own, independent investigations of the allegations/claims, are now forced to back-peddle and explain their own actions.

Journalism 101: Show your Proof

a reply to: Krakatoa

I felt vindicated when Snowden made his revelations to the worlds press. And you have to remember that it was a big press firm, a couple of them in fact, which were instrumental in getting that data to us!

However, it would certainly seem that in this instance, the press member/publication involved with this story have been co-opted.

a reply to: TrueBrit

I feel that the British Govt is making an extra effort trying to falsely vilify Snowden in the UK, if not more around the world. And folks say the US govt is bad. Well, to be honest, ALL governments are not beyond doing anything and everything to sway the public toward their own warped view of the world. I am glad we have proof, in the open, right now.

Hey GCHQ, show us the proof! Otherwise, keep your allegations to yourself. The constant claim that Snowden compromised the lives of good men is wearing very thin. Don't be surprised if there's a new angle to demean Snowden in the coming months.

a reply to: Krakatoa

The funny thing is, in moving to censure free thought and expression in this manner, the governments of the developed world appear to be more honest with us about their intentions, than at any time in my life.

I suppose, even though it speaks of bleak things to come, that we should be grateful for that... Right?

a reply to: Krakatoa

Saying um that many times in a CNN interview is clear evidence he is nervous. Hook him up to a lie detector test and ask those same questions.

I get the impression that with these types of situations of alleged secret information, from WikiLeaks to Disclosure Project and Snowden etc, a lot of people can jump on board that bandwagon and essentially make things up about having these files and threatening to give them to so and so etc. Life insurance policy type actions and general PsyOps and blackmail. And when you are dealing with countries like Russia and China... America's enemies, essentially - more or less. I don't know.

I do recall that when the Snowden story broke, he was hiding out in some hotel in Hong Kong, and he made a few references to the fact that the CIA embassy was just down the street. So who knows what he is really up to. Another strange anecdote I heard was that Snowden had wired up a satellite to be downloading data for a couple years surreptitiously. To what end?

a reply to: Krakatoa

They're not journalists, they're "propaganda channels". You don't need proof for propaganda. And if you noticed, many people even here on ATS instantly believed that story. They even mocked the people who called out the contradictions in that story.

a reply to: Krakatoa

This RT vid has the guy doing his mmm yea well .

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
a reply to: Krakatoa

They're not journalists, they're "propaganda channels". You don't need proof for propaganda. And if you noticed, many people even here on ATS instantly believed that story. They even mocked the people who called out the contradictions in that story.

I know. That was another reason I posted it here on ATS. I read some of that thread, and didn't participate since I didn't know if it was true yet an was waiting.

Like proof was ever needed that western media just make sh*t up, they do it all the time.

As for the U.K., well the corrupt elite of the U.S. view Snowden as an enemy, so the U.K. will tow the U.S. line like the obedient dogs they are.

That article easy to dismiss as BS while looking at other sources. What's sad was those who ran with it as truth because it validated their preconceived notions. Hope this sets it more straight now.

originally posted by: Krakatoa

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
a reply to: Krakatoa

They're not journalists, they're "propaganda channels". You don't need proof for propaganda. And if you noticed, many people even here on ATS instantly believed that story. They even mocked the people who called out the contradictions in that story.

I know. That was another reason I posted it here on ATS. I read some of that thread, and didn't participate since I didn't know if it was true yet an was waiting.

Well thanks for posting this. Hopefully this will stop some of the kneejerk reactions. Or at least get people to check that a source is credible before having that kneejerk reaction.