Glenn Greenwald: Lamo Told Manning "None Of This Is For Print;" Wired Hid This Fact

[Hissyspit]

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald

THURSDAY, JUL 14, 2011 06:15 ET
Wired publishes the full Manning-Lamo chat logs

By Glenn Greenwald

- snip -

MANNING:  uhm, trying to keep a low profile for now though, just a warning

LAMO: I'm a journalist and a minister. You can pick either, and treat this as a confession or an interview (never to be published) & enjoy a modicum of legal protection.

- snip -

So Lamo lied to and manipulated Manning by promising him the legal protections of a journalist-source and priest-penitent relationship, and independently assured him that their discussions were "never to be published" and were not "for print."  Knowing this, Wired hid from the public this part of their exchange, published the chat in violation of Lamo's clear not-for-publication pledges, allowed Lamo to be quoted repeatedly in the media over the next year as some sort of credible and trustworthy source driving reporting on the Manning case, all while publicly (and falsely) insisting that the only chat log portions it was withholding were -- to use Poulsen's words -- "either Manning discussing personal matters . . .  or apparently sensitive government information."  As BoingBoing's Rob Beschizza put it in rejecting Wired's claims: this passage "reads like a deliberated attempt to manipulate or even entrap Manning, on Lamo's part, and seems quite important to understanding what Manning thought he was doing by talking to him."  There are multiple passages for which that's true.

- snip -

MANNING: he wont work with you if you reveal too much about yourself

So here's Manning making clear that Assange has virtually no idea who Manning even is, that Assange purposely goes out of his way not to know the identity of WikiLeaks sources, and -- to use Manning's words -- Assange "takes source protection uber-seriously."  Does anyone need to explain how relevant that is to public discussions of WikiLeaks generally or the specific suggestions that Assange could or should be prosecuted as Manning's co-conspirator?  Independently, that Assange is fanatical about source protection is crucical to know. 

MORE

[Robb]

1. At real newspapers, a confidentiality promise can't be given unless (usually) two editors sign off.

Even then, typically if criminal behavior is involved, the editors usually say "no."

It's a suitable twist that neither Lamo nor Greenwald work for real newspapers, of course. Neither, I'd add, did Judith Miller. :D

[pacalo]

2. Ouch. That was a bit harsh toward Greenwald.

Besides being a lawyer, he seems to have earned his credentials as a journalist:

In March 2009, he was selected, along with Democracy Now!'s Amy Goodman, as the recipient of the first annual Izzy Award by the Park Center for Independent Media, an award named after famed independent journalist I.F. "Izzy" Stone and devoted to rewarding excellence in independent journalism. The selection panel cited Greenwald's "pathbreaking journalistic courage and persistence in confronting conventional wisdom, official deception and controversial issues."

In October 2010, he won the Online Journalism Award for Best Commentary, for his investigative article on the arrest of U.S. Army Private Bradley Manning as the alleged leaker to WikiLeaks.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glenn_Greenwald

[EFerrari]

3. Wired lied to make their source look good.

And then they kept lying to try to make Assange and Manning look bad.

They come off a sleazebags.