There is a journalistic ethics debate to be had over how the South China Morning Post is treating information they gained from an interview earlier this month with Edward Snowden. How much more does the SCMP know?
The newspaper’s leader on Tuesday contained further revelations from their original Snowden interview, which was almost 2 weeks old by then. The ‘exclusive’ stated that Snowden sought his job at Booz Allen specifically to gather evidence on NSA surveillance. Until Snowden clarifies this, it seemed a very tenuous conclusion to draw from a two-word answer he gave in response to a question about his role at Booz… Nevertheless, SCMP’s Editor-in-Chief Xiangwei Wang told Phoenix TV that Snowden had requested that this information was held back until a specified time when the ‘dust had settled‘. As we know from the Leveson Enquiry, it is not unusual for journalists to negotiate terms or agree to such deals with sources, but has this been the case for all of SCMP’s drip-fed NSA revelations?