I’m not doubting the N Korean scheme to infiltrate IT jobs. There’s even that woman who was prosecuted (I think she lived in Arizona?) because she is one person who acted as a facilitator for this scheme. My point is the BBC ran a story with an “anonymous” source then admits in the middle that they couldn’t substantiate any of the claims. That’s the problem here.
Okay, my mistake, i misinterpreted it. To be fair with BBC, they point out in the title and article that this is just some transcript of someone anonymous, and they try to tie each allegation with reports from other sources to back up their likeliness. I guess it’s the best you can do with someone anonymous ? Revealing the company, dates, or town might compromise the anonymity. I have this low-key uncomfortable feeling of “well, there’s nothing that proves it” with most anonymous reports i read or hear, even when it’s for events that are common otherwise.
In cases like these the journalists can and often do say something to the effect of they were able to corroborate the claims. But you’re super right about being careful, because they also can mishandle the data they receive to the point where they dox the anonymous source, too. That’s what happened with Reality Winner and The Intercept. They botched it, and she was arrested.
I’m not doubting the N Korean scheme to infiltrate IT jobs. There’s even that woman who was prosecuted (I think she lived in Arizona?) because she is one person who acted as a facilitator for this scheme. My point is the BBC ran a story with an “anonymous” source then admits in the middle that they couldn’t substantiate any of the claims. That’s the problem here.
Okay, my mistake, i misinterpreted it. To be fair with BBC, they point out in the title and article that this is just some transcript of someone anonymous, and they try to tie each allegation with reports from other sources to back up their likeliness. I guess it’s the best you can do with someone anonymous ? Revealing the company, dates, or town might compromise the anonymity. I have this low-key uncomfortable feeling of “well, there’s nothing that proves it” with most anonymous reports i read or hear, even when it’s for events that are common otherwise.
In cases like these the journalists can and often do say something to the effect of they were able to corroborate the claims. But you’re super right about being careful, because they also can mishandle the data they receive to the point where they dox the anonymous source, too. That’s what happened with Reality Winner and The Intercept. They botched it, and she was arrested.