Rushes Sequences - Daniel Schmitt interview - London (Video)
Post categories: International stories,ÌýNation state,ÌýProgramme three,ÌýProgramme two,Ìýclips and rushes,Ìýconspiracies,Ìýinterviews,Ìýprivacy,Ìýrushes,Ìývideo
| 12:05 UK time, Thursday, 3 December 2009
Daniel Schmitt is a spokesperson for . a site which specialises in the anonymous online publishing of sensitive corporate, governmental and organisational documents. He met with the programme two team to discuss information's desire to be free and the means by which governments and others might work to prevent the internet from facilitating that informational freedom.
These rushes sequences are part ofÌýour promise to release contentÌýfrom most of our interviews and some general footage, all underÌýa permissive licence for you to embed, or download a non-branded version and re-edit.
In order to see this content you need to have both Javascript enabled and Flash installed. Visit ³ÉÈËÂÛ̳ Webwise for full instructions. If you're reading via RSS, you'll need to visit the blog to access this content.
-------------------------------------------------
Transcript:
(Please note that this transcript is the 'raw data' text we receive from a transcription company. It is a tool commonly used in production to facilitate editing and review the content. We publish it for users in that same spirit, rather than it standing as a 'perfect' representation of the content.)
Alex Daniel tell me about Wikileaks?
Daniel One of the Wikileaks is an Internet platform, erm it's a platform that was created to publish documents, that are in the interest of the public. ÌýSo primarily we focus on documents that are not supposed to be published, but that erm because they are in the interests of the public need, need to be erm published.
Alex What types of documents, so can you give me an example?
Daniel Well erm we're focusing on any sort of official documents, so erm any documents that were issued by some formal interview like within a company a government, erm a certain department erm anything that you have not been writing up yourself but that has been issued within them, within an organisation.
Alex Now that's traditionally the domain of, of Whistle blowers who would then take this, these documents to the traditional media, why have you chosen to keep it within the web?
Daniel Well we're not keeping it within the web, but we're offering exactly for whistle blowers we're offering a platform where they can first of all anonymously contribute they're documents. ÌýSo erm this is a result of erm the position that the media has all over the world, certain developments. ÌýSo erm in many countries, today, erm a journalist cannot guarantee the safety for his sources any more, erm you can be forced by a court ruling to give information about your sources as a journalist for example. ÌýErm in some countries erm there is, there are no ways for people to get in touch with reliable journalists, to even find out who they could trust. ÌýSo its very important to offer one entity, like us erm that, that has a reputation and that is erm offering this anonymous way for people to submit this information.
Crew talking
Alex Daniel I'd like to pull apart this notion of anonymity.
Daniel Ok.
Alex Yeah so you say that people can publish the documents anonymously. ÌýHow, do you know, I mean surely there's some benefit in knowing who's publishing them to, to assess the veracity of the documents?
Daniel Yes, well, well if you want to verify a document, erm then it surely helps if you know who has sent it to you for example. ÌýBut that's just one piece of information in the ideal case we don't want to have. ÌýSo we've sort of set up a system that erm or a scheme and within this scheme was can successfully verify documents without knowing the source. ÌýThere is a lot of possibilities on how to do that. ÌýSo you, you don't necessarily need to be in touch with the source to be able to verify a document.
Alex What types of things do you do to, to assess the veracity of the claims?
Daniel Erm well I mean we are primarily dealing with digital documents. ÌýSo in, 98% of the cases we are getting them digitally, so submitted via our web front end, erm this means that in the first erm as a first action we can have like a forensic examination of a document. ÌýSo technical people can have a look at a technical document or a digital document, they can check if a document has been modified, when it has been modified for the last time if they, like if there are like traces of a photo shop or other imagery tools where the image manipulation tools erm or whatever a kind of process this document has been going through digitally, so that is one aspect. ÌýThen we have a big network of people that we work together with, that can help verifying the content of a document. ÌýSo, these can be people working within a company, within a government, that are related to this erm we can verify the context of a document so we might know that the document is known to exist, it has been issued in a certain context and we can cross check if the content of the documents match up with the context. ÌýErm, we can erm contact erm the issuer of the document, so that is another, just, just dial up the ones that have supposedly issued this document and just ask them about it. ÌýThis gives you some insight as well. ÌýSo there are multiple approaches that you can take and erm the sum of all these approaches is what in the end is the verification of the document. ÌýSo and depending on what document you want to verify, this case is always unique, so it's always a unique combination of people you work together with erm unique approaches you take and a unique outcome for each document as well.
Alex What's interesting?
Crew direction
Alex So while the, the source of the document is anonymous, that puts a lot of the spotlight on Wikileaks, erm what types of repercussions, governmental, private, how, how is Wikileaks protected from ultimately becoming the scapegoat for, for the controversial claims that, that are put forward?
Daniel Well erm, this is a very, that's a complex question. Erm first of all it's a Wikileaks is a journalist entity, so we are recognised all over the world as a journalist entity and erm we've established some, some technical means to ensure that we can use the countries with the strongest journalist protection for example. ÌýSo every .. document that we get, so if someone surf's to our website and submits us a document, this document becomes part of a source journalist communication. ÌýAnd its technically, its routed via various countries and like Sweden, Belgium and a few others. ÌýSo this is something that happens without anyone noticing when just using the website. ÌýBut by routing it via these countries, you get to benefit from the journalists, or media protection laws that these countries have. ÌýOr a source protection laws. ÌýAnd erm that's one approach how, how you can, erm how you can establish erm that what you are doing has a legal protection. ÌýEven if, if the journalist is sitting in, in Germany and the source is sitting in the United States, so its still part of a communication that is going through Sweden and Belgium. ÌýSo, erm so now we have 4 jurisdictions that are already involved, erm just in this communication then there is a fifth person that has erm that has registered the Domain name for example and the domain is registered in the six countries, so erm so its all a matter of where actually would you be shooting at, and where would you trying to prosecute someone erm its, its just raising the level, or raising the bar for someone who is trying to, to prosecute this or to scapegoat.
-----------------------------------------
Daniel Yes, yeah well its basically Internet censorship is becoming an issue for every western country, it's the biggest issue that we face in our time. ÌýSo, erm just coming out of Germany for a meeting you here erm this is one of the, the basic topics we have right now in Germany, is that erm the ministry of the erm the family ministry actually has started a, a very shallow and erm propagandistic campaign erm to promote Internet censorship erm to fight child pornography. ÌýSo what we can see in many countries, so this happens in other European countries like a lot in Scandinavia as well, Italy is another example, France is thinking about this, Austria is erm something similar exists here in the U.K. as well. ÌýSo what we see is that erm, erm politicians take various stigmatised topics that no one really dares to, to doubt, so they are taking a stigmatised topic like child pornography and they say we want to fight this and so who is against our struggle against child pornography. ÌýSo no one wants to be the one saying I don't want a censorship system against child pornography. ÌýBut in the end, at the end of the day it's not about a certain content that you're filtering. ÌýThe filter, the censorship system itself is neutral, it doesn't care what somebody tells it to filter. ÌýAnd then its just a matter of what kind of lobby has enough political power to push into this censorship system, so very fast, from a world where we have this beautiful Internet that connects us all globally, where very human that connects to the Internet is the same as another human being that is connected, has the same voice, the same importance the same possibility to spread the word to everyone else, where all these things that we take for granted, that we have experienced within the Internet, where all these things from one day to the other can cease to exist basically. ÌýJust because the regulation has been introduced in the wrong way, because we have not protected us but we have rather given someone the right to control us, or to police us.
Alex So is government then the greatest that, sorry I'll try that again.
Alex So is government the greatest threat would you say or are there other entities that will be greater?
Daniel Everyone who is trying to, to pursue his interest on the Internet is a threat to the Internet. ÌýJust because, within the Internet you don't have these kind of interests. ÌýYou are the same as I am and my provider gives me access in the same way that you have or are getting access on the remote end of the world. ÌýIt's Protocol, it's the Internet protocol that people have agreed upon. ÌýIt's the same thing as I know when I am dialling +44 on the phone, I'm getting a connection to the U.K., so I don't have to worry that my provider now is doing something different with +44 or introduces I don't know advertising when I'm trying to dial for a number. ÌýSo in the same way we have to make sure that the Internet stays neutral. ÌýThat it will just be a transport mechanism, in the same way that we have postal mail, or the telephone.
Comment number 1.
At 21st Mar 2010, MoratBD wrote:Notice how it was filmed in a noisy car park, Daniel obviously isn’t great at English and might be nervous, the way the reporter spoke to him got my back up and the convenient car and interruptions? The guy was made to look stupid here.
Let me clean that up... ( ) = what I’ve added; interpreted what Daniel Schmitt is saying
Compare the 2.
Alex Daniel tell me about Wikileaks?
Daniel One of the Wikileaks is an Internet platform, it's a platform that was created to publish documents that are in the interest of the public. So primarily we focus on documents that are not supposed to be published, but (need to be) because they are in the interests of the public.(
Alex What types of documents, so can you give me an example?
Daniel Well we're focusing on any sort of official documents, so any documents that were issued by some formal (communication) like within a company (or) government, a certain department anything, [that you have not been writing up yourself but that has been issued within them, within an organisation.] (I interpret this as an original formal document that could prove a wrong doing)
Alex Now that's traditionally the domain of, of Whistle blowers who would then take this, these documents to the traditional media, why have you chosen to keep it within the web?
Daniel Well we're not keeping it within the web, but ( ) for whistle blowers we're offering a platform where they can first of all anonymously contribute they're documents. (We do this because) of the position that the media has all over the world (due to past) developments. So in many countries today a journalist cannot guarantee the safety for his sources any more, you can be forced by a court ruling to give information about your sources as a journalist for example. In some countries there are no ways for people to get in touch with reliable journalists, to even find out who they could trust. So it’s very important to offer one entity, like us that, that has a reputation and that is offering this anonymous way for people to submit this information.
Crew talking
Alex Daniel I'd like to pull apart this notion of anonymity.
Daniel Ok.
Alex Yeah so you say that people can publish the documents anonymously. How, do you know, I mean surely there's some benefit in knowing who's publishing them to, to assess the veracity of the documents?
Daniel If you want to verify a document then it surely helps if you know who has sent it to you for example. But that's just one piece of information in the ideal case we don't want to have. [So we've sort of set up a system that or a scheme and within this scheme can successfully verify documents without knowing the source. There are a lot of possibilities on how to do that. So you, you don't necessarily need to be in touch with the source to be able to verify a document.]
Alex What types of things do you do to, to assess the veracity of the claims?
Daniel we are primarily dealing with digital documents. So in, 98% of the cases we are getting them digitally, so submitted via our web (site) end, this means that in the first as a first action we can have like a forensic examination of a document. So technical people can have a look at a technical document or a digital document, they can check if a document has been modified, when it has been modified for the last time if they, like if there are like traces of a photo shop or other imagery tools or the image manipulation tools or whatever a kind of process this document has been going through digitally, so that is one aspect. Then we have a big network of people that we work together with, that can help verifying the content of a document. So, these can be people working within a company, within a government, that are related to this we can verify the context of a document so we might know that the document is known to exist, it has been issued in a certain context and we can cross check if the content of the documents match up with the context. We can contact the issuer of the document, so that is another, just, just dial up the ones that have supposedly issued this document and just ask them about it. This gives you some insight as well. So there are multiple approaches that you can take and the sum of all these approaches in the end is the verification of the document. So and depending on what document you want to verify, this case is always unique, so it's always a unique combination of people you work together with unique approaches you take and a unique outcome for each document as well.
Alex What's interesting?
Crew direction
Alex So while the, the source of the document is anonymous, that puts a lot of the spotlight on Wikileaks, what types of repercussions, governmental, private, how, how is Wikileaks protected from ultimately becoming the scapegoat for, for the controversial claims that, that are put forward?
Daniel Well, that's a complex question, first of all it's a Wikileaks is a journalist entity, so we are recognised all over the world as a journalist entity and we've established some, some technical means to ensure that we can use the countries with the strongest journalist protection for example. So every document that we get, so if someone (visits) our website and submits us a document, this document becomes part of a source journalist communication. And its (basically(?)), its routed via various countries and like Sweden, Belgium and a few others. So this is something that happens without anyone noticing when just using the website. But by routing it via these countries, you get to benefit from the journalists, or media protection laws that these countries have (because these countries have stronger laws to protect privacy of the web users). Like source protection laws. And that’s one approach how you can establish that what you are doing has a legal protection (for the journalists). Even if, if the journalist is sitting in, in G(erm)any and the source is sitting in the United States, () it’s still part of a communication that is going through Sweden and Belgium. So now we have 4 jurisdictions that are already involved, just in this communication then there is a fifth person that has that has registered the Domain name for example and the domain is registered in the six countries, so it’s all a matter of where actually would you be shooting at, and where would you trying to prosecute someone it’s just raising the level, or raising the bar for someone who is trying to, to prosecute this or to (use as a) scapegoat.
----------------------------------------- why the pause? What was cut out?
Daniel (the) Internet censorship is becoming an issue for every western country, it's the biggest issue that we face in our time. So just coming out of G(erm)any for a meeting you here this is one of the, the basic topics we have right now in G(erman)y, is that the ministry of the family ministry actually has started a very shallow and propagandistic campaign to promote Internet censorship to fight child pornography.( So what we can see in many European countries, like in Scandinavia, Italy is another example, France is thinking about this, Austria is & something similar exists here in the U.K. as well. So what we see is that politicians take various stigmatised topics that no one really dares to, to doubt, so they are taking a stigmatised topic like child pornography and they say we want to fight this and so who is against our struggle against child pornography. So no one wants to be the one saying I don't want a censorship system against child pornography. But in the end, at the end of the day it's not about a certain content that you're filtering. The filter, the censorship system itself is neutral; it doesn't care what somebody tells it to filter. And then it’s just a matter of what kind of lobby has enough political power to push into this censorship system, so very fast, from a world where we have this beautiful Internet that connects us all globally, where every human that connects to the Internet is the same as another human being that is connected, has the same voice, the same importance the same possibility to spread the word to everyone else, where all these things that we take for granted, that we have experienced within the Internet, where all these things from one day to the other can cease to exist basically. Just because the regulation has been introduced in the wrong way, because we have not protected us but we have rather given someone the right to control us, or to police us.
Alex So is government then the greatest that, sorry I'll try that again.
Alex So is government the greatest threat would you say or are there other entities that will be greater?
Daniel Everyone who is trying to, to pursue his interest on the Internet is a threat to the Internet. Just because, within the Internet you don't have these kind of interests. You are the same as I am and my provider gives me access in the same way that you have or are getting access on the remote end of the world. It's Protocol, it's the Internet protocol that people have agreed upon. It's the same thing as I know when I am dialling +44 on the phone, I'm getting a connection to the U.K., so I don't have to worry that my provider now is doing something different with +44 or introduces I don't know advertising when I'm trying to dial for a number. So in the same way we have to make sure that the Internet stays neutral. That it will just be a transport mechanism, in the same way that we have postal mail, or the telephone.
_________
I would like to say to the ³ÉÈËÂÛ̳ this is how I interpret the situation and may not be the intended meaning of the speaker...
Complain about this comment (Comment number 1)
Comment number 2.
At 24th Mar 2010, MoratBD wrote:OK i take it back!
He askedd to meet in an underground car park... some of the programs on the superpower season are quite good now I had a chance to listen to the whole thing!
Complain about this comment (Comment number 2)