I noticed this for the first time on The New Yorker website. The link is little ways down the first page (right).
It takes you to a page that explains the process of sending a highly confidential tip to The New Yorker.
This service began in May so this is old news, but new to me and perhaps some others here.
This morning, The New Yorkerlaunched Strongbox, an online place where people can send documents and messages to the magazine, and we, in turn, can offer them a reasonable amount of anonymity. It was put together by Aaron Swartz, who died in January, and Kevin Poulsen. Kevin explains some of the background in his own post, including Swartz’s role and his survivors’ feelings about the project. (They approve, something that was important for us here to know.) The underlying code, given the name DeadDrop, will be open-source, and we are very glad to be the first to bring it out into the world, fully implemented. www.newyorker.com/...
Obviously The New Yorker intends to move more aggressively into the realm of investigative reporting, and I trust they have a staff of savvy sleuths like Newsweek’s Kurt Eichenwald and Washington Post journalist David Fahrenthold.
I expect — I hope — that other MSM publications and networks, and even progressive websites which have journalists capable of the aggressive following up on tips begin to enable tipsters to utilize Strongbox.
Update/correction: Thanks to the research by several commenting Kossackers we know that major MSM publications followed The New Yorker in using Strongbox to assure they could enable tipsters to reach them with the assurance that their identities would remain confidential, that the prying eyes of Big Brother wouldn’t know who they were. Based on this gratifying information I changed the title of this diary.
This sure beats meeting in a reporter in an underground garage in Rosslyn, Virginia.
Wednesday, Dec 21, 2016 · 3:58:59 AM +00:00 · HalBrown
Thinking more about “1984” and how the Ministry of Truth was tasked with distorting the past, changing history books, to further the goals of the Party. Keeping in mind that Orwell published the book in 1947 he saw the power of the lie in Nazi Germany. Orwell describes how the population is manipulated through “doublethink.” By subjecting them to constant propaganda they lived in fear. The Party, like with Trump, managed to get many people to believe anything no matter how illogical.
Wednesday, Dec 21, 2016 · 4:10:47 PM +00:00 · HalBrown
You write as one who’s not previously familiar with the New Yorker. They probably have the best overall staff of investigative repoters in the country. While there are individual standouts at other publications (Eichenwald, Farenthold, Taibbi), the New Yorker has been publishing superb investigative journalism by a variety of writers for a very long time.
Jane Mayer is a particular favorite of mine. She is the person most responsible for unmasking the Koch Brothers.
Thanks you for pointing this out. I was so focused on recent exposes involving Trump and his appointees that I forgot that:
The New Yorker has a long tradition of excellence in investigative reporting; many of the fifty-six National Magazine Awards we’ve won since 1970 have honored investigative pieces, like Daniel Lang’s “Casualties of War” (1970) and Seymour Hersh’s “Torture at Abu Ghraib” (2005). www.newyorker.com/...
I wouldn’t compare them to other publications because I just don’t know which has “the best.” I’ve read the magazine since I was a child (starting with merely the cartoons). They have published many investigative pieces along with great profiles, culture, and fiction. They have a large writing staff, with many familiar names, from Andy Borowitz and Garrison Keillor to Seymour Hirsch who exposed the My Lai Massacre, and ironically won the George Orwell Award) and as you noted Jane Mayer.
The fact that they are so multifaceted means they have to have enough staff of investigative journalists, and when needed, researchers to help them to dig deep into the facts behind the tips.
It is a hopeful sign that publications like The New Yorker and Mother Jones, not necessarily known for news reporting, are now part of the movement to stop the doublethink machine that has taken over the country.
--—
I would also add a shout-out to The Guardian for their coverage on the U.S. election and follow-up on Donald Trump. It’s good to know the Brits are keeping an eye on us.www.theguardian.com/…
An this:
The US election showed that honesty is not as important as we might have wished. If all politicians lie, all that matters is what they lie about.