Usama Farooq BSMC 2K10

Look closely at the steps taken by the Guardian and its partners to ensure that they are redacting the cables responsibly. Are they being overly cautious--or not cautious enough? Several steps were taken by The Guardian and its partner to redact the data. First: Database. The Guardians system editor, Frayman formulated a database which could be searched by keyword, name, date or phrase. The database was further refined to search by individual embassies or by the degree of classification. This made it possible to analyze the cables before being published. Second: Redactions. The team redacted any reference which might threaten the lives of those named. The team was careful to such an extent that they not only censored the names, but also the place name, date and time, and pronouns which could tell the gender of the person. This was done to make sure that no source or individual could be recognized. Thirdly: Proofreading. Jon Casson the production manager was responsible to re-read the stories and check, if anything was missed the first time. To such an extent the team worked to make sure that no source or individual could be identified and that the stories are uniform. Fourthly: Collection & sensitivity. Casson designed an online spreadsheet of the cables by ID number for the stories, whether cables are redacted or not and coordinated with other publications. This made it possible for uniform publication of the stories. Some cables that were sensitive in nature were not published. Like strategic secrets, nuclear power plants or oil pipelines etc. Taking the steps into consideration I think that they were overly cautious.