Page One: Inside the New York Times Page #2

They just dropped it off

on YouTube

and waited

for everybody else to find it.

Even with "The Pentagon Papers,"

they had to be delivered by hand

and they can stop the presses.

This, they're just

taking it and they're just

putting it up there

where everybody can see it.

- Hello.

- Yes sir.

Hi, Al, anything new on your front today?

Very significant...

this goddamn "New York Times" expos

of the most highly-classified

documents of the war.

Well, God damn it,

I am not going to have it.

I mean,

could "The Times" be prosecuted?

Look, as far as "The Times"

is concerned, hell, they're our enemies.

I think we just oughta

do it and anyway, nobody

from "The New York Times"

is to be talked to.

The decision

to publish "The Pentagon Papers"

was the moment

when the American news media

stood up and said,

"We are independent of the presidency

and we are going to do what

we think is the right thing to do."

Do you feel, Mr. Sulzberger,

that the national security

is endangered,

as charged by the administration?

I certainly do not.

These papers, I think

as our editorial said this morning,

were really a part of-

a part of history

that should

have been made available

considerably longer ago,

and I just didn't feel

there was any breach

of national security

in the sense that we were

giving secrets to the enemy.

Julian Assange,

editor for WikiLeaks,

denies that the site

has put troops in danger.

Assange is clearly an advocate

and opponent of the war.

Assange made a name

for himself as a hacker,

and was arrested

for computer crimes

before starting

his whistleblower website.

We would like to see the revelations

that this material gives

investigated by governments,

and new policies

put in place as a result,

if not prosecutions.

I gotta try Julian again,

because I have not heard

back from him at all.

Hello?

Hi, it's Brian Stelter

calling from "The Times."

There is a traditional definition

of journalism that is objective,

totally legal, never breaking

the law to obtain content.

Do you view yourself as trying

to achieve that definition,

or is your definition

of journalism broader?

And tell me what the goal is.

Tell me what the goal is.

I don't know whether what

he's doing is good or bad.

I mean, clearly, you know,

in an open society,

you know, information is,

you know, is important.

It's vital for people to make decisions.

On the other hand, there are things

that can get people in trouble.

The video was edited in a way

that did not show the full story.

It was presented as journalism,

but it had, you know, an agenda.

Is "journalist" a word

you attach to yourself?

Rate this script:3.0 / 2 votes