So this is James Risen. You may know him as the Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter for The New York Times. Long before anybody knew Edward Snowden's name, Risen wrote a book in which he famously exposed that the NSA was illegally wiretapping the phone calls of Americans. But it's another chapter in that book that may have an even more lasting impact. In it, he describes a catastrophic US intelligence operation in which the CIA quite literally handed over blueprints of a nuclear bomb to Iran. If that sounds crazy, go read it. It's an incredible story.
呢個係 James Risen 佢係紐約時報嘅記者 佢榮獲普立茲獎而為人熟悉 喺大家仲未聽過 斯諾登呢個名字之前 James Risen 因為寫咗本 揭露美國國家安全局 非法竊聽美國民衆通話嘅書 而備受矚目 但本書嘅另一章 可能有更加深遠嘅影響 裏邊佢描述咗美國情報部門 一次慘烈後果嘅行動 上面講咗中情局將核彈嘅設計圖 交咗畀伊朗 如果你覺得太瘋狂,你可以去讀下 內裏真係難以置信
But you know who didn't like that chapter? The US government. For nearly a decade afterwards, Risen was the subject of a US government investigation in which prosecutors demanded that he testify against one of his alleged sources. And along the way, he became the face for the US government's recent pattern of prosecuting whistleblowers and spying on journalists.
你估咩人會唔鍾意嗰一章? 美國政府 差唔多往後嗰十年 James 都係美國政府調查嘅對象 調查嘅官員亦會要求佢 指證佢聲稱嘅消息來源 佢變成咗美國政府 最近一系列起訴泄密者 同監察記者行動嘅代表人物
You see, under the First Amendment, the press has the right to publish secret information in the public interest. But it's impossible to exercise that right if the media can't also gather that news and protect the identities of the brave men and women who get it to them. So when the government came knocking, Risen did what many brave reporters have done before him: he refused and said he'd rather go to jail. So from 2007 to 2015, Risen lived under the specter of going to federal prison.
喺第一修正案之下,為咗公眾利益 新聞界有權報道各種秘密消息 但係如果媒體冇辦法收集消息 冇辦法保護呢班無畏無懼嘅線人 就冇辦法行使呢個嘅權利 所以當政府人員搵上門 James 好似以前好多嘅記者咁 佢拒絕提供任何消息 佢寧願坐監 2007 年至到 2015 年 James 响監視下 開始佢喺聯邦監獄嘅生活
That is, until just days before the trial, when a curious thing happened. Suddenly, after years of claiming it was vital to their case, the government dropped their demands to Risen altogether. It turns out, in the age of electronic surveillance, there are very few places reporters and sources can hide. And instead of trying and failing to have Risen testify, they could have his digital trail testify against him instead. So completely in secret and without his consent, prosecutors got Risen's phone records. They got his email records, his financial and banking information, his credit reports, even travel records with a list of flights he had taken. And it was among this information that they used to convict Jeffrey Sterling, Risen's alleged source and CIA whistleblower.
就喺審判前幾日,有樣奇怪事發生咗 政府喺堅持 James 係 本案關鍵嘅幾年之後 政府突然放棄咗對 James 嘅所有要求 喺電子監控年代 記者同線人根本冇地方匿 與其一次又一次被 James 拒絕舉證 政府可以用佢嘅電子記錄 嚟指證 Jeffrey Sterling 於是喺完全機密而且未經同意嘅情況下 控方攞到 James 嘅電話紀錄 郵箱紀錄、理財同銀行資料、信用報告 甚至佢坐過嘅航班紀錄 控方喺呢啲紀綠當中搵到證據 起訴 Jeffrey Sterling Jeffrey 就係 James 聲稱嘅消息來源 同埋中情局嘅泄密者
Sadly, this is only one case of many. President Obama ran on a promise to protect whistleblowers, and instead, his Justice Department has prosecuted more than all other administrations combined. Now, you can see how this could be a problem, especially because the government considers so much of what it does secret. Since 9/11, virtually every important story about national security has been the result of a whistleblower coming to a journalist. So we risk seeing the press unable to do their job that the First Amendment is supposed to protect because of the government's expanded ability to spy on everyone.
好遺憾,呢一類嘅事成千上萬 奧巴馬總統應承過保護泄密者 但係相反 佢嘅司法部門拉嘅告密者 比其他部門加起嚟仲多 所以依個係好大嘅問題 尤其當政府對佢哋嘅祕密咁敏感嘅時候 9.11 之後,基本上所有 關於國家安全嘅重大新聞 都係由告密者提供畀記者嘅 正因爲政府監視住所有人 新聞界好難行使 第一修正案賦予佢哋嘅權利
But just as technology has allowed the government to circumvent reporters' rights, the press can also use technology to protect their sources even better than before. And they can start from the moment they begin speaking with them, rather than on the witness stand after the fact. Communications software now exists that wasn't available when Risen was writing his book, and is much more surveillance-resistant than regular emails or phone calls. For example, one such tool is SecureDrop, an open-source whistleblower submission system that was originally created by the late Internet luminary Aaron Swartz, and is now developed at the non-profit where I work, Freedom of the Press Foundation. Instead of sending an email, you go to a news organization's website, like this one here on The Washington Post. From there, you can upload a document or send information much like you would on any other contact form. It'll then be encrypted and stored on a server that only the news organization has access to. So the government can no longer secretly demand the information, and much of the information they would demand wouldn't be available in the first place.
不過正如科技幫政府 監視記者嘅一舉一動 新聞界都可以 以其人之道還治其人之身 利用科技保護佢哋嘅線人 保護仲可以從第一次對話就已經開始 而唔使喺佢哋被審嘅時候先嚟保護 宜家好多通訊軟件 喺 James 出書嘅時候冇嘅 而且反監視能力 比一般電郵同電話好好多 例如有一款叫 SecureDrop 嘅軟件 依個係一款開放原始碼嘅告密系統 由亞倫 · 斯沃茨 一位過咗身嘅互聯網大師開發嘅 喺我做嘢嘅地方,新聞自由基金會 繼續開發緊 與其傳送電郵 你可以去某個新聞機構嘅網站 譬如依度華盛頓郵報 喺依度你可以上載檔案或者傳送訊息 就好似其他網上嘅聯絡表格咁 資料會被加密喺伺服器入面 得新聞機構嘅人可以睇 所以政府冇得再祕密追蹤依啲信息 就算追蹤到 都好大機會唔會係一手資料
SecureDrop, though, is really only a small part of the puzzle for protecting press freedom in the 21st century. Unfortunately, governments all over the world are constantly developing new spying techniques that put us all at risk. And it's up to us going forward to make sure that it's not just the tech-savvy whistleblowers, like Edward Snowden, who have an avenue for exposing wrongdoing. It's just as vital that we protect the next veteran's health care whistleblower alerting us to overcrowded hospitals, or the next environmental worker sounding the alarm about Flint's dirty water, or a Wall Street insider warning us of the next financial crisis. After all, these tools weren't just built to help the brave men and women who expose crimes, but are meant to protect all of our rights under the Constitution.
SecureDrop 只係 21 世紀 保護新聞自由嘅一個小小工具 不過世界各地嘅政府 時時刻刻都開發新嘅監視技術 令我哋更加危險 所以我哋只能夠繼續努力 唔單止保護善於科技嘅告密者 好似斯諾登咁 有自己嘅渠道揭發政府惡行 仲要保護嗰啲 透過揭發退伍老兵醫療問題 提醒我哋醫院擠迫問題嘅告密者 保護嗰啲帶出費林特市污水 隱患嘅環衛工人 保護警惕我哋 下次金融危機來臨嘅華爾街中人 所以,依啲工具唔係爲咗 保護敢於揭發罪行嘅線人 而係爲咗保障憲法下 所有人得到應有嘅權利
Thank you.
多謝
(Applause)
(掌聲)