Pierre Omidyar, Glenn Greenwald and the ownership of the Snowden’s leaks

Mark Ames writes: Who “owns” the NSA secrets leaked by Edward Snowden to reporters Glenn Greenwald and Laura Poitras?

Given that eBay founder Pierre Omidyar just invested a quarter of a billion dollars to personally hire Greenwald and Poitras for his new for-profit media venture, it’s a question worth asking.

It’s especially worth asking since it became clear that Greenwald and Poitras are now the only two people with full access to the complete cache of NSA files, which are said to number anywhere from 50,000 to as many as 200,000 files. That’s right: Snowden doesn’t have the files any more, the Guardian doesn’t have them, the Washington Post doesn’t have them… just Glenn and Laura at the for-profit journalism company created by the founder of eBay.

Edward Snowden has popularly been compared to major whistleblowers such as Daniel Ellsberg, Chelsea Manning and Jeffrey Wigand. However, there is an important difference in the Snowden files that has so far gone largely unnoticed. Whistleblowing has traditionally served the public interest. In this case, it is about to serve the interests of a billionaire starting a for-profit media business venture. This is truly unprecedented. Never before has such a vast trove of public secrets been sold wholesale to a single billionaire as the foundation of a for-profit company.

Think about other famous leakers: Daniel Ellsberg neither monetized nor monopolized the Pentagon Papers. Instead, he leaked them to well over a dozen different newspapers and media outlets such as the New York Times and Washington Post, and to a handful of sitting senators — one of whom, Mike Gravel, read over 4,000 of the 7,000 pages into the Congressional record before collapsing from exhaustion. The Papers were published in book form by a small nonprofit run by the Unitarian Church, Beacon House Press.

Chelsea Manning, responsible for the largest mass leaks of government secrets ever, leaked everything to WikiLeaks, a nonprofit venture that has largely struggled to make ends meet in its seven years of existence. Julian Assange, for all of his flaws, cannot be accused of crudely enriching himself from his privileged access to Manning’s leaks; instead, he shared his entire trove with a number of established media outlets including the Guardian, New York Times, Le Monde and El Pais. Today, Chelsea Manning is serving a 35-year sentence in a military prison, while the Private Manning Support Network constantly struggles to raise funds from donations; Assange has spent the last year and a half inside Ecuador’s embassy in London, also struggling to raise funds to run the WikiLeaks operation.

A similar story emerges in the biggest private sector analogy — the tobacco industry leaks by whistleblowers Merrell Williams and Jeffrey Wigand. After suffering lawsuits, harassment and attempts to destroy their livelihoods, both eventually won awards as part of the massive multibillion dollar settlements — but the millions of confidential tobacco documents now belong to the public, maintained by a nonprofit, the American Legacy Project, whose purpose is to help scholars and reporters and scientists fight tobacco propaganda and power. Every year, over 400,000 Americans die from tobacco-related illnesses.

The point is this: In the most successful whistleblower cases, the public has sided with the selfless whistleblower against the power- or profit-driven entity whose secrets were leaked. The Snowden case represents a new twist to the heroic whistleblower story arc: After successfully convincing a large part of the public and the American Establishment that Snowden’s leaks serve a higher public interest, Greenwald promptly sold those secrets to a billionaire. [Continue reading…]

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

5 thoughts on “Pierre Omidyar, Glenn Greenwald and the ownership of the Snowden’s leaks

  1. Davejoe

    I have no brand, label, party or personal loyalty. At the end of the day the only thing that counts is actions. And when I see Greenwald, I see a lot of courageous reporting, writing and debating for the right causes. This article is full of innuendos and accusations of guilt by association. Until I see clear evidence to the contrary I am with Greenwald. I am more than willing to give him the benefit of doubt when he takes Pierre Omidyar’s help in creating a new model for real journalism in the US. BTW making money and becoming famous (in honest ways) is neither a crime nor reprehensible. So I’ll say “go Glenn go” until there is a demonstrable reason to do otherwise.

  2. bobs

    Ames has an axe to grind yet this kind of criticism is welcome as long as we know where it’s coming from. I think Greenwald is playing with fire. The Guardian is the world’s most influential newspaper. Meanwhile GG’s new venture will be a one trick poney show for years to come. Whether people will keep tuning in is unknown. Thing is, there’s much more to our sad world that the NSA’s wrongdoings. It’s unclear GG’s bandwidth extends past civil liberties. Important as it is, it’s not enough to sustain a viable media outlet.

  3. delia ruhe

    Looks as if Alistair MacDonald of the WSJ has succeeded in getting the ball of anti-Poitras-Greenwaldism rolling. This should be interesting.

Comments are closed.