@Jay: Adrian is a source and a subject. If I had a social relationship with him, I'd have disclosed it in the story. You're right that we haven't posted the chats, and I concede that others might have made a different call.
I answered every single one of Greenwald's questions about my reporting on the Manning story, and the Columbia Journalism Review has reported on exactly how the story began.
I've written hundreds of stories for Wired.com since I started in 2005, about a wealth of topics, including government surveillance, online sexual predators, politics, cyberwarfare, and dozens and dozens of different hackers. You know this, since you've picked up many of them, by me and my staff at Threat Level.
Prior to Manning, I'd written about five stories in that same time period about, or quoting, Adrian Lamo (by my quick Google search.) In other words, an average of about one a year, out of hundreds. You have to go back to 2000-2002 to find me reporting frequently on him, and even then he wasn't exclusive to me. It's true that he usually told me about his intrusions before other reporters, but not always. And he always talked to other journalists afterwards. His hacks were reported by national media outlets, including the major newswires, and were the subject of a documentary, so the idea that he had to "go to" me to get press seems ludicrous on its face.
I reported on his 5150 for Asperger's last month because it was interesting, even if it wasn't "newsworthy," and to date I've received nearly as much e-mail from people with Asperger's thanking me for that story as I've gotten hate mail from Greenwald readers who think Threat Level is suddenly part of a vast government conspiracy.
Re: Greenwald
@Modplan: Those aren't questions.
@Jay: Adrian is a source and a subject. If I had a social relationship with him, I'd have disclosed it in the story. You're right that we haven't posted the chats, and I concede that others might have made a different call.
Re: Greenwald
@Modplan, what questions are those?
Greenwald
Mike,
I answered every single one of Greenwald's questions about my reporting on the Manning story, and the Columbia Journalism Review has reported on exactly how the story began.
I've written hundreds of stories for Wired.com since I started in 2005, about a wealth of topics, including government surveillance, online sexual predators, politics, cyberwarfare, and dozens and dozens of different hackers. You know this, since you've picked up many of them, by me and my staff at Threat Level.
Prior to Manning, I'd written about five stories in that same time period about, or quoting, Adrian Lamo (by my quick Google search.) In other words, an average of about one a year, out of hundreds. You have to go back to 2000-2002 to find me reporting frequently on him, and even then he wasn't exclusive to me. It's true that he usually told me about his intrusions before other reporters, but not always. And he always talked to other journalists afterwards. His hacks were reported by national media outlets, including the major newswires, and were the subject of a documentary, so the idea that he had to "go to" me to get press seems ludicrous on its face.
I reported on his 5150 for Asperger's last month because it was interesting, even if it wasn't "newsworthy," and to date I've received nearly as much e-mail from people with Asperger's thanking me for that story as I've gotten hate mail from Greenwald readers who think Threat Level is suddenly part of a vast government conspiracy.
As a reminder, I and my writers were first to post the AT&T/NSA wiretap documents; we sued DHS to get them to comply with the FOIA; were first to report that Hushmail had been subverted by law enforcement; first to report on the FBI's use of spyware delivered through browser exploits; the first to report on Wikileaks; and first to report in detail on the executive branch's abuse of the state secrets privilege.
Kevin Poulsen
senior editor - wired.com
klp@wired.com
I heard you on my drive home. Nicely done.