字幕列表 影片播放 列印英文字幕 "Good morning. My name is Malachy Browne. I'm a senior producer on the Visual Investigations team here at the 'Times.' Thanks for tuning in and sending questions in advance. We've got dozens of questions from viewers and readers of the 'Times,' which we're going to go through. First of all, we're going to introduce the team." "I'm Haley Willis." "Hey. I'm Evan Hill. I'm a visual journalist on the team." "I'm Barbara Marcolini." "Christoph Koettl." "And Christiaan Triebert." "And one of the first questions that we got is what is open-source investigation? So Christiaan, have a go." "Yeah, so basically, open-source investigation is it's reporting, but using any kind of openly-available source. So think of a Facebook post, or a tweet, a YouTube video, or just a database-- anything you can find online, openly, and for free. So this is the opposite of closed source. Like if a source tells me something or tells my colleague something, you will need to believe that source. But the strength of open-source reporting is that anyone with an internet connection and a laptop can access that same source and can take the same steps for verification. So that's what we do here-- a lot of open-source investigation." "And a lot of the process, if there is an event that we're investigating, it involves, as Christiaan said, collecting as much evidence as we possibly can, you know, from the open web. There's so much documentary visual evidence out there now that allows us to get to the truth of an event to break it down and really analyze it moment by moment. And so that could be video satellite imagery, a timestamp from a tweet, but it also involves turning those open sources who are witnesses into primary sources, and finding secure ways to get in touch with them, and find out more about what they saw, very often get the raw imagery as we did in Syria. Do you want to talk about that a little bit?" "Yeah, I think that was an interesting one because that combined sort of traditional reporting methods with the open-source stuff that I've been learning as a new member of the team. But for that story for Syria, we needed to get a wealth of material." "Do you want to explain what the series was about just for a second?" "Yeah, so it was a series of stories about Russian bombing of hospitals in Syria and other civilian targets that came out over the course of last year. And we needed to get a bunch of material from the ground-- videos and photos from Syrian journalists. And so that was basically who we can find through WhatsApp networks, through activist networks, people we can reach out to and expand our sources on the ground speaking in Arabic a lot of the time." "And the key was using the material to identify the minute that a strike happened." "Yeah, and that included metadata analysis, so going into the actual files, explaining to the sources on the ground the best way to send the files to us so that we can extract the information from the file to confirm, oh, yes, we heard the airstrike occurred at 5:00 PM. We'll the file tells us, yes, it did occur at 5:00 PM." "And by establishing the very minute of those attacks, then we obtained access to thousands of intercepted recordings of Russian pilots carrying out their missions. And so by understanding the time that something happened on the ground, we could then examine what was going on in the skies at that time, and then, you know, basically apportion blame to specific pilots for attacks on hospitals, on an IDP camp, a busy commercial street in Syria. So the evidence that witnesses are collecting and that we're managing to verify through our processes here can be really valuable to the journalism. How did you get your start in OSINT? OSINT is Open-Source Intelligence. It's a term that lots of people use to describe this work. We call it visual investigations or open-source investigations. Choose your term, but how did you get your start in it, Barbara?" "I actually started working at Storyful. Storyful is an agency that verifies content on social media. So that's how I started, just working at this agency and learning from their experience there, which by the way, Malachy used to work for them." "I came from Storyful too. That was where I got my start too. Haley?" "I got my start working with a student collective actually at the University of California, Berkeley at our Human Rights Center. We had a lab that did this kind of work for human rights legal cases and for advocacy groups. We had a partnership with Amnesty International and their Digital Verification Corps. So that's kind of how I started this work is using the same open-source techniques that everyone's been talking about, and we applied that to kind of human rights issues." "Christoph?" "I got my start at Amnesty International in 2007, so quite a while ago. And back then, I think when I started at Amnesty, it's the first time that a human rights group started using satellite imagery. So that was my-- well, that is my speciality. We did a lot of work around satellite imagery for a few years, and then around 2011, it became just extremely important with the Arab Spring to verify YouTube videos, photos, and similar materials. So we had to teach ourselves, basically, how to verify that and how to integrate that into human rights reporting." "Yourself?" "So I was an aspiring journalist as a student, so I tried to do photo reports in Iraq, and Syria, and Ukraine, but I felt like I'm not the best writer there is in the world and I'm also not the best photographer. So I felt like what am I doing? What am I contributing to what is already out there, right? Anyone with an internet connection can find stories that are better written, have better photos. And I was intrigued by a guy called Eliot Higgins, who started Bellingcat, an open-source investigation group. And I just started tweeting. Literally on Twitter, I started tweeting out my findings because in Iraq, I saw airstrikes in the distance, but I didn't know much about it except for I could say, well, an airstrike happened. But by using that same kind of satellite imagery Christoph was talking about, I could figure out when did the airstrike or what did it target, who was in control of the village. And I started tweeting out those findings and got involved in 2015-- so wow, five years ago-- with this group called Bellingcat. And I've been doing that ever since before I joined the 'Times' last year." "A great question to get started on the practices from Natalie in Toronto and Sena in Tehran-- how do you verify a video? There's lots of different ways you can verify video, but maybe we'll cut to a show and tell. We have one from recently when the Ukrainian airliner crashed down outside Iran. Iran was denying that it was shot down. There were reports at the time that it was allegedly due to technical malfunction. And over the course of a few days, we had started mapping out the evidence related to the downing of that airliner. It killed over 170 people on board. Maybe we'll just walk through that. You've got a slide show that I'll cut to here. Sorry, not that one. It's on Keynote. Bear with me for a second. Yeah, there we go." "Right, so let's just start with it right?" "Yeah." "So PS752, it basically started for us with a Slack message from a colleague, who was like, whoa, a plane has been crashed in Iran. And we were all on high alert. It was the evening here in New York. Basically, the whole team was still in the office because Iran had just launched those ballistic missiles onto military targets in Iraq. So we were all on high alert. And then this message comes in and we're like, O.K., whoa, let's investigate it. So one of the first things we're doing with this is open-source reporting. We explained it in a lot of words, but it's an actual example. This is a plane crash. Now, any commercial airliner nowadays is being tracked. And anyone with an internet connection can track those flights through websites like Flightradar24, RadarBox24. And here, we see the actual flight path of the plane that allegedly crashed near Tehran. And we can see how it's here on the-- it's starting to take off. It's departing the International Airport near Tehran, the capital of Iran. And we can see how it flies away. And we can also see the flight path is not that long. It basically stops right here. Now, the great thing is that we can also download this flight path for free and put it in a program that's called Google Earth. And Google Earth is just basically Google Maps on steroids. It's, as you can see here, this is the same flight path that we just saw on the website. It's now on Google Earth and you can see it's also in 3D. The height is also visible. And we can see exactly where the last transponder sign of that flight was spotted. That's the first start for us, just to have basic information about the incident and have a sense of time and space. Now, it started to get morning already in Iran. And before people started uploading photos from the crash site, people saw that plane going down. And you can see it here. There are different videos. Here, we see the plane, but we couldn't verify those videos at first. But what we did is we matched them up with this explosion to be sure, hey, that they are showing the same incident. So these videos seem to be from the same plane crash, so it's a first step. We hadn't verified the location of this, but the crash sites were-- sorry-- anyone nowadays has-- usually, a lot of people have a mobile phone, right? And Tehran is a massive city. So if something like this happened what you just saw in those videos is that people start filming something when it happens. I mean, think of yourself. Imagine something big is happening. And here, we can see a video from the actual crash site when the morning has broken already. And one method we use, usually as a first step for verifying a video to come back to the question, is a process we call geolocation. And geolocation is determining where a photo or a video has been taken based on visual clues in the video. Well, let's have a look. We see a lot of debris. We see people running. It's a chaotic scene. We don't see a big visual clue, like the Eiffel Tower, but hey, what we see there? We see something like a water tower. I marked it here on the right so you can see it. Now, a water tower may seem like a small visual clue, but the thing is we knew the general area where the plane had last spotted the transponder signal, so then we started looking on the map for all the water towers basically we can find that look similar. And eventually, we did find a water tower right here. And I'll zoom in a bit here on Google Earth. And you can see here on the left or above it, you can see it has the same markings in red and white on it. And basically, we started matching those two to each other, right? So we have a visual clue in the source material-- the video we want to verify-- and we tried to match it with reference footage-- in this case, satellite imagery. And the great thing is this is all openly-available information, so you can recreate that process, or what we see, what we depend on a lot as well is the community, is you actually doing those same steps, right? You're trying to find that water tower and you're tweeting it out, just like I did five years ago. So here, we see another photo. Later on, aerial photos came out. And we were pretty confident about the location. But now if we compare those two photos with each other-- the satellite image-- we can see, hey, we have the same park. We have the football field in the background. And now, it's basically 100% confirmation, like hey, the videos we were seeing from the crash site were taken here. What is also good to mention is that obviously, that community is great, but also a lot of people may jump to conclusions. So we did see posts popping up like these. And they were like, look, these are shrapnel remnants. This is shrapnel damage in a part of the airplane. Right, you see those holes? And if a missile explodes next to a plane, it would leave such damage. However, online investigators pointed out, hey, look at this. Actually a high resolution photo of the same debris of the plane shows that these are not holes in the plane, but they're actually stones laying on top of it. And that's pretty important because obviously, a stone is not the same as shrapnel damage. So this was not evidence that the plane was shot down. But then this video appeared on Telegram and we tried to do that exact same process again-- geolocation, using reference footage or the source image trying to verify the video by visual clues. And actually, Malachy-- I could say our boss on the team, right-- he knows how to do this very well as well, so maybe, you can have a word about how you verify this video." "Yeah, because we had been looking around Parand and we had a mind map of how it all unfolded-- the flight path where it lost its signal over this town called Parand that you're seeing in the background and there's very distinct buildings in the background. There's also, you see, small little what looks like a security cabin with a security light, a mast of a light beside it. And we're looking at all of these details. And then towards the end of the video, you see this small kiln on the right-hand side. And basically, it looked like a building site. And by knowing the direction that the camera is facing and how it would intersect with the path of the plane, we could narrow down approximately where it should have been filmed if it indeed showed the missile being downed. And yeah, we found the corner basically. And another piece of verification was the sound in this one because you see the flash, but it takes 10.5 seconds for the camera to hear that. We know the altitude and we know the direction that the flight was taking, so we can calculate the vertical-- the y and the x-- the distance from the camera across the ground, and then calculate the hypotenuse and estimate how fast sound travels over that distance. And it was approximately 10.5, so that was just another point of corroboration. And we very quickly put that out. But just we'll cut back to the team and the questions. Now, how do I get out of that?" "As Malachy goes out of it, just one reminder that what he was talking about is the-- how do you call this in English-- the Pythagoras' theorem. It's like high school math, right? I was really not good at the math, but like, using that very simple mathematics to figure out the question that is massively important for news today to find out what happened-- how 176 people died-- it's like kind of mind-blowing. It was to me because you're, like, trying to do this basic maths again and you're like, O.K., maybe I should have paid attention in high school." "Question from Ahmad in Maryland. Maybe Christoph, you could answer this. How do you select your stories?" "Sure. I mean, that's obviously a really good and challenging question. If you follow the news, there's a lot of things happening every single day. So I think what we're really specializing in or what at the core of our work is, you know, governments put out official accounts of what happened, right? And I think the example that we just heard about is very good. Iran was saying like, we don't know what happened and they were putting out various theories. So that's something we want to look at. It doesn't matter if this is in Venezuela, or in Syria, or in any country in the world. There are always official accounts from governments and they are presented as the authoritative story, right? This is exactly what happened. As journalists, we are very, very critical towards these stories. We have to question these accounts. It doesn't matter if it's a government, or maybe a single agency, or if state media is putting something out. We want to be very critical and raise very important questions if this is really how it happened or maybe they're admitting that this happened, but they're playing down the impact of a specific event. I think one of the strongest examples here is our investigation in the Douma chemical weapons attack, where both the Syrian regime and also the Russians were saying like, well, that didn't even happen, and if it happened, it was not us. So we want to look at that and look behind that. And that takes a very long time, but that is something we really want to do because it's such a big story, we want to make sure that the truth eventually comes out. That takes a lot of time. That takes a big team effort, but I think that's one of the main things that we look at when we want to do stories. Something very obvious I think that I want to point out is we cannot just do any story. We are visual investigations team, so we rely on visuals. So if there are no visuals, it's a little bit harder for us to do our work. So that's another factor that we consider." "I might play the introduction to the Douma story actually, just as an example of how we collect evidence and what that looks like. Just a warning-- some of the images in this introduction are graphic, but here we go." [VIDEO PLAYBACK] "The UN has accused the Assad regime of repeatedly committing war crimes in Syria, including a chemical attack in April on a town called Douma. It killed dozens of people and triggered US-led strikes inside Syria. To this day, Syrian officials and their Russian allies deny the attack ever took place." "There were no dead bodies found." "This is a theater." - [NON-ENGLISH SPEECH] "The event did not take place." "So it's a farce." "Finding out what really happened matters. Entire families were killed and the regime went to great lengths to conceal the evidence. Our investigation is the most detailed reconstruction of the attacks so far. We analyzed a trove of videos and interviewed dozens of witnesses and experts. We scoured some evidence with the investigative group Bellingcat, and we teamed up with the agency Forensic Architecture to create a virtual model of the crime scene. We center on one building that confirms where the attack happened, one bomb that shows who carried it out and when, and the victims, whose symptoms tell us what happened-- a lethal chemical attack. The evidence combined exposes Syria and Russia's lies." "Where is your concrete evidence about what happened?" "The concrete evidence is right here." [END PLAYBACK] "Just a couple of key pieces of evidence that allowed us to over-- this, by the way, took us 2 and 1/2 months, about five of us reporting on it. Seven of us in all, you know, bylined on this story, which means that they were closely involved in the reporting of it and the production of it. But a few things give us a sense of what's happening in Douma that day if we're not there ourselves. First of all, satellite imagery. You know, by looking at before and after images of Douma, you can see that this particular street was obliterated over 24 hours. And the question was, well, why? In a leaked UN report that our reporter in Geneva, Nick Cummings-Bruce, obtained, the UN said that there was an ambulance run along that street leading to an underground hospital. And in fact, you know, there was a tunnel at the end of that street leading to a hospital under the building opposite. We spoke to many of our sources in Douma and they pinpointed in maps that they send to us where that tunnel entrance was and confirmed that it was an ambulance run. So the Syrian regime was trying to cut off access to that hospital. And it was along this street that the chemical attack happened. And so that's some coincidence if indeed, the Syrian government's account that this was a staged event, if that were true. And you know, what we do in our stories is we try to be transparent with people about the evidence. And so this is a video filmed by an activist from the balcony of that building. And we're calling out our geolocation, basically-- what Christiaan explained a little bit before. Barbara, do you want to talk about this? There were very fragmentary pieces of video coming through because communications were difficult. And what we were trying to do was to get a continuous video carrying us through a building to basically establish that all the victims were in one place. Do you want to talk about that process?" "Yeah, so one of the challenges that we had with this story was that you had images from outside the building and you have many videos from apparently inside a building. And we wanted to make sure that all these videos had been filmed inside one location, so all those victims had died in one building and not that there were more than one. So we looked for videos-- we looked for architectural clues from inside this building to understand, O.K., are all these videos filmed in the same place? So I worked with a journalist who has a background in architecture. And by watching those videos, we were able to build a 3D model of that building. And we could see from the beginning from entering the building, going up the stairs, entering rooms, kitchens, bathrooms, we were able to see that all of those videos were in the same space. And as we were doing that, we were also counting bodies. One important thing was the location of where we found these bodies. So people in Syria had been warned that whenever they smelled a strong smell of chlorine, they should go to higher ground and wash their faces with water. And as we were touring this building looking at the videos from inside this place, we were seeing that most of the bodies were inside kitchens and bathrooms and in the stairwells. So we could recreate and have a better understanding of what happened inside that building on that night." "Yeah, we also worked with the research team in London, Forensic Architecture, to create a 3D model of the balcony where the bomb landed and the chlorine spilled down into that building where people were coming up into it trying to get some relief. They were actually walking up towards the source of the chlorine. And you know, what this allowed us to do is to create a virtual model of it, and examine the space for ourselves, and examine how the debris around the place related to the weapon itself. Bellingcat had done a lot of good work on this as well. Do you want to talk-- were you involved in that, Christiaan?" "It was mostly led by others, yeah." "By others?" "But yeah, I mean, what specifically? Oh, yeah, this for example, like this slide is maybe interesting to mention. I mean, if they're watching-- and I don't know whether it was Eliot or Nick Waters that pointed it out-- but just to see, like, Malachy has basically highlighted here a part of the barrel bomb. But if you're just looking at this picture as a whole and without it being highlighted, it's like there's just, like, it's trash. There's debris laying around. But really just it's not even like a tool that detects it for you, but it's just looking very, very closely through those images and what am I actually looking at? And what they discovered is that the tangled remains here are actually of the kind of-- how would you say this in English-- the--" "It's a rigging." "--the rigging around the canister, which here, it shows this very well-- and the tangled remains of it. And here, you can see it in a different attack, how it looks like when it's still around the canister. So it's just really looking at those close and tiny details on individuals. And even, if we go to the next slide, you can see that the pattern of what we believe is-- I'm sorry--" "It's kind of a lattice." "A lattice." "--lattice above the balcony, and it fell through. And you can see that the squares of the lattice are basically imprinted on the canister, suggesting that it fell from a height and smashed through the roof, leaving those markings on the canister." "One of the most revealing things was this, I thought. It was what looked like it could be cloud. You know, it's one of the first videos that was filmed as somebody went into the building after the attack. And it looked like it could be moonlight in the clouds. But our video team said, no, the camera would never pick that up. And so when we color corrected it-- Eliot actually spotted this as well at Bellingcat-- when you color corrected, you can see that it's actually the shape of the canister sitting in the hole. And you know it's in the same position from the photographs that were taken the following day, but why is one white and why is it yellow? Our photographers here examined this footage and said, you know, it would never reflect as white. It would always reflect as yellow. And we contacted the Chlorine Institute. And they told us that what happens when these highly compressed bombs suddenly open, it's called auto-refrigeration and it's a behavior that have been seen in previous chemical attacks as well. And that was a really important clue because it meant that this was an active bomb and that it wasn't placed there after the fact to try to stage an event, as Syria had been declaring. And if we could get the metadata-- the file information-- of this video that was filmed on the left-hand side, that would give us a timestamp for approximately when the attack happened. And thousands of people were shipped out of Douma after that, including the person who filmed this video, but we found him in Turkey a couple of weeks later and got the metadata from that file. And indeed, it was that night when, you know, by this stage, 15 or 20 other witnesses had told us that it had happened, and so that was also another clue. Anyway, I'll end there and move on to the next question. What's the most difficult part of your reporting? This is Matthias from Chile. Who wants to take that question? Barbara? Evan?" "I mean, something that's been extremely difficult with the Syria reporting, I think for all of us who've been on it, is the fact that you have these networks of people who are on the ground under bombardment, don't have a lot of food, they're fleeing their own houses, and yet they're still working, right? These people are still shooting photos, taking videos, doing interviews. And without them, we wouldn't be able to do our work. And they want results. And it's also hard to pay these people oftentimes. And there's rules about that. And you don't want to put people in danger. But they want to see results from their reporting and they're struggling in these conflict zones. And the best that you can tell them is we're getting the story out. And I do think it's obviously worthwhile, otherwise I wouldn't be doing what I do, but that's quite difficult." "Haley?" "Yeah, I mean, and I think that speaks to probably a wider issue with this kind of reporting, and I guess any kind of reporting when you're reporting on conflict zones and issues like this, is something called secondary trauma or vicarious trauma. And what that means is when you're reporting a story, when you're doing what we are, when you're speaking to these people who are on the ground and guilt that may come from that from your position or when you're spending eight hours a day watching graphic content-- as Barbara was explaining, walking through a building looking at bodies-- that can have an effect on you. And I think that's probably all of us would agree is sometimes the hardest part of this work. And it's also the reason why we do it because these are very important stories. Fortunately, at the 'Times,' we have professional resources for that. There's, I think, a lot of awareness on the team of what that looks like and we look out for each other. And I think another important thing to recognize that speaks to Evan's point is that sometimes, you can feel guilty for being affected by the work, especially if you're not in it [? live ?] and you're here at the 'Times.' And I think part of it is being very aware of the fact that looking after yourself and being aware of the fact that this work can take a toll is not selfish. It helps you sustain the work and it helps you get the story out. And that's what's important here is telling the story." "Yeah, I think what Haley said is very important. When we did that Syria piece, the Douma piece, I had nightmares for weeks just remembering those images of those bodies. And it's really tough. And another thing that I think is important is many stories that we are doing, we are covering places where there is conflict. Maybe we are covering stories where there were no journalists on the ground at that moment that could tell the story. And we are trying to get any residual information that can inform our reporting. So sometimes, this part of gathering the information and being able to report all sides of a story that we were not able to be on the field is the most difficult part of the reporting." "O.K. Mohammed from Islamabad-- how does the reporting process differ from a print story? Great question. Christoph, do you want to take that one?" "Yes, I love that question because I struggle with this question, I guess, every week. So coming from a background where you do more writing-- a human rights group-- I am used to more like write everything down and that's the most important part-- writing out all the facts, explaining everything in a lot of detail. So then you start working here at a video team, where you have to write a script. When you start doing that, it just doesn't work. So I think the most important thing is you have to really think much more about the story, but the most important thing is you have to think about the visuals, right? I cannot just write stuff and I have no visuals for it. So what I still find hard and I'm still learning is you really, really have to write to the visuals and you have to let the visuals lead the story. And that is a massive difference to a print story. The other part, which is very obvious and that is also a daily challenge-- something is happening and we want to do a video story. It might take at least a couple of days to put that story together, which means there might be a hundred other journalists who have already written that story, right? So we have to think very strategically which stories we want to pick, and what sort of angle, and what new things do we bring to that story because we know print reporters will be much faster in the daily reporting, right? So that's something, I think, to consider. It's very, very hard. It's a lot of fun to learn it, I guess, but it's a challenge, I think." "We have a great collaboration with the print hub as well and with some of the designers up there. And you know, they love the fact that a lot of what we're presenting, the reporting is visual. And so they've done incredible double-page and quadruple-page spreads with the material. Several of us have tweeted those out, and you can find them as PDFs online if you're interested in checking that out. Question from James from Albany-- have governments reacted to your reporting? Great question. The impact that our reporting could have is something that we always assess before we embark on something that's really ambitious and could be potentially months long. And the answer is yes. You know, although this is innovative and sort of a new form of journalism, it's rooted in answering traditional investigative questions. And so for instance, you know, the Nigerian army said that they acted in self-defense when their military opened up on unarmed protesters in the capital Abuja a couple of years ago. And you know, we got on the ground. From social media and from other sources, we collected a lot of video of that. And we were able to-- Christoph worked on that intensely-- and we were able to show that that was BS, basically, that it was a lie, and that they killed many more people than they claimed that they had killed. And it was really a brutal assault. They were using battlefield weapons. They blew arms and legs off people clean with bullets. And [INAUDIBLE] it was a very powerful story that resonated in Nigeria. There's a very strong Twitter sphere in Nigeria. And in press conferences after that, Nigerian journalists pressed the interior minister about the reporting and asked had they seen what we had put out there. And the government later launched an inquiry into that. The work has been cited in State Department reports, in UN investigations. I believe we did a deep investigation, which we might we might show later, on the shooting of a medic in Gaza. And an IDF commander months after that came out was asked if they had seen the report and if there was any response. And we understand that they said that there had been a modification to the use of live fire along the border fence with Israel. Now whether these things are true and whether the Nigerian investigation actually came to anything, we don't know, but governments have responded to this type of work. The Russian government, of course as well, has really tried to diminish the reporting, and attack the reporting that we're putting out there, and said that we're falling foul of a campaign of disinformation within Syria, but the volume of independent evidence and visual evidence really rebuts that claim. Question here-- there is an inescapably political nature to this work. For example, western investigative journalism on China has a strong political incentive to paint China in as negative a light as possible. How do you and the team view this issue and deal with it in your work and how you report? How should other journalists report in a way that earns trust? This is Will from Tokyo. Thanks, Will. Christoph, you've been reporting on China." "Sure, I mean, I think a general statement on this question is and that works really well, I think, for our team, we try to build very, very compelling stories obviously, but at the core of these stories is evidence. And we really build stories that are driven by the evidence and there's just no space for any sort of political opinion or bias. And that's the short answer to it I think with the coronavirus right now that we're looking into, we have done a couple of short news videos and not any big investigations yet, but that I think is a good example, right? So we receive a lot of videos. And we are very, very careful with that. We verify these videos in a way that Christiaan was explaining at the beginning. And we want to make sure we provide the proper context. And that is really, really important because a single video that you see coming out of Wuhan might be a little bit misleading. We had a case this week where it was not entirely clear if the people we saw in the video actually died from the virus or from another cause. And that's something we cannot determine from the video itself. So that's something we're still looking into and we would not publish that because that would be very irresponsible. Once we get there, again, we present the facts and that's basically the gist of it, in my opinion." "Question from students from SF State-- how long does it take to create an investigation from start to finish? Haley, do you want to have a go?" "That really depends on the investigation, I would say. We've done investigations that were day turns. Just recently, I did an investigation on police violence against protesters in India during the citizenship amendment bill protests. And that was basically a 12-hour process and was published the next day after we started it. But there's investigations, like Douma, which we showed, which Malachy said that took two or three months. I know the Gaza investigation, which has also been spoken about, took almost six months. And it kind of depends on the level of investigative reveal, the urgency of the story, if it's more of an enterprise investigation as opposed to something that's current happening right now. That's something that influences how long it takes. Also kind of the level of different styles of reporting that we include, whether or not it's fully reliant on open sources or whether or not, in the case of Gaza, we want to go on the ground and we want to interview people as well. So all of those kind of go into it. It's really dependent upon the story how long an investigation takes." "I don't see this kind of journalism in Latin America. How can we push it and how do you see it evolving into the future? That's a question from SlackAt on YouTube. Barbara?" "As the Latina in the team, yes, I think not only Latin America, but many other countries in the world could be doing more open-source investigations. Basically, as Christiaan said, everything you need is Wi-Fi and a laptop. There are great tutorials. Bellingcat has great, like, pieces, articles where they explain what they do, how they do. So I guess it's a matter of journalists and of course, news organizations investing in this kind of work. And there is a great amount of resources out there where journalists and citizen journalists can start learning and developing this kind of work." "Yeah, one thing I would just say about that quickly is that this technique, you can see it spreading quickly everywhere. And so we've even been beaten by a Syrian outlet called Verify-sy, which took a Russian propaganda video of airstrikes and showed that they had actually hit IDPs-- displaced people-- and not an armed group. And they did it, and I mean, we admired that work." "Yeah, and I think also one big point, as you can see, this is the core team, right? And the team has done stories on Latin America and more will be coming. But please do tip us, right? Email us-- any one of us. Write us an email via Twitter, via YouTube. It doesn't really matter-- Facebook. If you think, hey, you and the team, you should really focus on this specific topic in Argentina, or Chile, and so on. So yeah, we're always open for that." "And I mean, I think one thing I want to add to be clear, I think there is a lot of-- well, there's always a lot of citizen journalism going on in Mexico, Venezuela, Brazil, and all over Latin America. And there's a lot of open-source verification work going on. It might not be called visual investigations, but to be clear, this is nothing that comes out of New York and spreads through the world. It's more the other way around, I would say. And we learn from everyone around the world who is doing this sort of work." "Absolutely. Yeah, I might just actually show this. We published this story today on the situation in Syria, which is a collaboration with our Beirut team and the graphics team in London-- Allison McCann, who pulled that together. And this includes some of what you just heard Evan describing there-- the Verify-sy-- but also a lot of sources on the ground who sent us footage or who were posting footage on open sources. And it really shows, you know, the scale-- the sheer scale of numbers of people and the dire conditions they face with the border closed in Turkey. It's less of an investigation, but this type of reporting can also be used for explanatory visual pieces, where the images are so strong, they help you tell the story. You know, this is another hospital-- yet another hospital-- that has been bombed in recent weeks during the campaign to retake it-- people who were fleeing whose bus was bombed. Back to the question, that leads us to another good question. Evan, question on how you build trust with sources and with key leads in your investigations, especially in sensitive investigations like the Jamal Khashoggi story. You didn't work on that story with us, but this is from Salwa on YouTube. Thanks, Salwa. Do you want to talk about that in relation to the Syria series?" "Yeah, yeah, absolutely. A hugely important question. And if you want to jump in on the Khashoggi investigation, you should. But I think so it's a challenge to build trust with sources when you can't meet them face to face, which in a lot of cases for us, we can't go to the ground and meet these people face to face. First thing is that journalists and people doing this work should know other languages. You should try to know the language of the country that you're reporting on and the people that you're speaking to. And if you don't know it, you should make an effort. So in the case of Syria, though by no means fluent, the ability to speak Arabic and communicate with people in Arabic is crucial. I think the second thing is that you have to treat these people with respect and as humans, and often as fellow journalists who are doing the same work that you doing. And that means not just going to them when you need something from them. That means going to them as a professional, and with compassion, and keeping up communications with them, and actually caring about what's going on in their lives, which is something we have to constantly remind ourselves to do, and another member of the video department who we work with a lot, Yousur, is quite good at. She's one of the best sourcers who I've ever met. And the way she does it is by treating these people with compassion and really caring about them." "I think--" "Do you want to talk about Hong Kong?" "Yeah, we build an amazing group-- like an amazing base of supporters and sources in Hong Kong. I spent almost three months in Hong Kong last year covering the protests. And I think one of the main things that helped me build trust with my sources in Hong Kong was my previous work. So every time I reached out to someone-- and in Hong Kong, most protesters I reached out through Telegram, so I wasn't meeting them face to face-- I would send examples of my past work so they would see the kind of work that we do. And that helped us build this trust because they saw that we were serious journalists trying to find the truth of what was happening there. Yeah, so I guess sharing, of course, being a human being, and treating others with the kindness that you would like to be treated is the most important thing, but also present them your work, and show that you are serious, and you are doing that work because you believe the truth needs to come out." "I'm also just going to walk through very quickly another story that we did, just to show how much we rely on the community and on those sources to provide us with, as Christoph described, the evidence really essentially that when we can collect and analyze it, you know, reveals something bigger about the story and gives us a much deeper insight. We're also going to be joined by Whitney Hurst, who's another member of the team, after this presentation. So this is a Palestinian medic, Rouzan al-Najjar, who was killed during protests on June 1st two years ago during protests around the border fence between Gaza and Israel. And the question was, how did she die? You know, the immediate news reports suggested that she was very close to the fence when she was killed, but our job was to really just start collecting visual evidence as quickly as we could. And getting the metadata was a key part of this. That's the file information that every video and photograph that's taken on a cell phone is imprinted with. And so we got, you know, entire cards from photographers who were there and in total, over 1,300 photos and videos direct from the devices of people that were there on that day. And that was an important part of our reporting because we weren't there to witness it. But by getting the metadata, we had the minute that each photo and video was taken, and we were able to string that out and see how the day unfolded, the violence that happened, the inflection points, the points of tension, and the reason that the soldiers of the IDF started to use live rounds. Some other techniques were, you know, this is the critical-- this is the moment of that gunshot that killed Rouzan al-Najjar. And we have it from five different angles. And by syncing that up, we can see what's going on at that time, what's happening near the fence, where are the crowd, where are people in relation to each other. And you can see them all flinching at that moment. And it kind of gives us, similar to the Iran crash, a kind of a mind map of the place. We also used Cinema 4D to-- we worked with Forensic Architecture on this investigation again. And we used Cinema 4D to stretch out videos as they panned around to create a panoramic of the situation. So that was important because we wanted to know what was going on between the protesters, the medics, and the fence. And that allowed us to kind of analyze that space and see what was going on there, how far they were away. And then we also sent high-definition cameras out there on drones. We droned the area and turned that into a 3D model of the space, sketched in details like the sand berms, the jeeps, the position of the snipers. And also, you know, as we're going frame by frame through the footage, we're calling out details. This is one of the medics that was hit in the leg by that bullet before it struck Rouzan al-Najjar. You can see he's holding his leg as he flees away. And the medic next to him, Mohammed, who was hit by debris and fell to the ground. You can see Rami's thigh is grazed by the bullet. And here in the back, you know, you see Rouzan. We knew it was Rouzan tucked away behind people because we oversaturated this image. Yousur, again, was working on this and she oversaturated it for a very distinct color of pink that was a stripe across the medics' vests. And we could see the pink glowing in this position here, and also with several of the other medics in that frame. And so what you're gradually seeing is that a bullet ripped through this crowd and through an area which was dense with medics in white coats. And the question was, was that a justified or a responsible shot to take? And with our 3D model because it was so high definition, we were able to put the cameras into the space, and trace the cameras through the model through months of meticulous work really, and identify the exact location of the key people in the frame. And doing that repeatedly from multiple angles and correcting it, we ended up with a 3D model of the space, which allowed us, essentially, to freeze that moment in time and examine it in space. And because we know that there was just one bullet at that moment and that it hit Rouzan, and it hit Rami, and we know their positions, we can trace it back to the source, which was three snipers who took up position. And we actually see them taking up position in the footage of that day on that sand berm just a few minutes beforehand. And we know the minute that it happened, and so when we had questions for the relevant authorities, we had very technical detail about what happened and could answer their questions. Anyway, just an example of that would not have been possible-- I'll end that presentation there now-- but that would not have been possible without the sources on the ground who had documented that and provided that raw footage directly from their devices for us by sending it electronically, but also when we went on the ground in Gaza and met them. And Iyad, one of our colleagues in Gaza, did a great job on that. We're joined now by Whitney Hurst. Do you want to introduce yourself?" "Hi, I'm Whitney Hurst. I'm a senior producer and I work on news and visual investigations sometimes." "Whitney has been intimately involved in the series that we did on Russian attacks on civilians and hospitals in Syria over the last while, but also the Nigeria investigation and some other ones." "Yemen." "Yemen, of course." "India." "India. We have a question here about South Asia and doing more stories from that region. Do you guys want to talk about that?" "Yeah, I mean, I briefly mentioned this, and Whitney chime in too, but we did one investigation-- Whitney and I-- already that was looking at what happened at Jamia Millia University during the citizenship bill protests, looking at how the police responded and whether or not that was an overt use of force. And we're still continuing to follow up on the story in India. I don't know if you want to speak to some of the things we've been thinking about." "Yeah, I mean, I think one of the interesting things, like what Christoph has mentioned this, but learning from a lot of the local journalists. I think India, obviously, has a very saturated media market. And it's been very impressive to watch the local Indian outlets that are doing a lot of sort of visual investigations and in fact, sometimes getting to it just a little bit quicker than we have. So we've been following this story closely. There's lots that we want to do. And we're following the protests and are working with a 'New York Times' journalist, [? Corinne, ?] who's been great. And we are looking into a bunch of things. I don't know if we can reveal anything yet, but we definitely want to continue to follow that story. It's a big one and an important story." "Another question. David from Kentucky saying, in that region, can you cover the illegal sand mining in Cambodia? Thanks for the tip, David, and keep the tips coming, folks. Christiaan, do you want to talk about how we might go about something like that." "I think he meant me." "Or Christoph, sorry." "It happens." "Too many Chris's." "For the viewers at home, Christoph, Christiaan." "And this happens like five times a day here. So I think my general comment first is that if you follow our work, you will notice we do a lot of armed conflict stories and also protest stories, but the team would love to expand our work, and that includes extractive industries, which I think is a really, really important topic in how extractive industries impacts the environment and communities. I am very interested in that because I work a lot with satellite images. And satellite images lend themselves really well to do this sort of work. On this specific topic on Cambodia, I've actually worked on that a few years ago. I did a little bit of work on that with Amnesty International. And there has been a lot of reporting by human rights groups, by local journalists, and by others. So I think there is still a story there. It's probably a question of what could be a very current angle on this story. So if there are ideas to do this story in 2020, we obviously would love to hear that." "A question about one of the tools that we use and our newsgathering. So a big part of this is the ability to turn over rocks on the open web and to find the clues that you want. So the question is from-- sorry, the document is saved in there-- are there any alternatives to SAM Desk-- so that's one of the tools that we use, S-A-M Desk-- for aggregating and monitoring live breaking events, trends, Liveuamap, maybe? This is from Cameron on YouTube. Thanks, Cameron. I'm going to turn to Christiaan and to Haley on that. Christiaan, do you want to go?" "Yeah, maybe Haley can start. You have worked more with SAM Desk than I do, I think." "Yeah, I mean, SAM Desk is great. Basically, it's a platform that allows you to aggregate content as you're finding it. You can tag it. You can label it and you can share it with other people while you're working on it. SAM Desk, if I'm not mistaken, is a paid service." "It's paid-for too, yeah." "And of course, this is something that we preach all the time, but this is work that you can do without paying for anything. I didn't work with SAM Desk before I came here. Liveuamap is great because it's collaborative and they aggregate a lot of the social media content that's out there, especially around specific regions. And they often try to pinpoint it on a map as well. Honestly, just bookmarking things on Twitter is how I used to do this or just throwing links into a Google Doc, and then using the Internet Archive to archive them in case they get taken down. I think a lot of the tools used for open source are least common denominator in the sense that anyone can access them, so don't think you have to pay a lot of money for SAM Desk to do this work. I think a lot of times what we do is a Google Doc collaborative. We're all throwing in links at the same time. We're all commenting at the same time. And sometimes, that's even faster and it's a free tool. So I don't know if Christiaan has anything to add to it." "No, I think that covers it pretty well, yeah." "I think for monitoring breaking news, I've worked a lot in breaking news previously when I was at Storyful and also here at the 'Times.' And just a simple, like, Twitter list. Like anytime when coronavirus started being an important topic, I made a Twitter list for this. Hong Kong, I follow an amazing Twitter list by Laurel Chor, a Hong Kong journalist. And whenever there's something happening in Hong Kong, I tune in her Twitter list to see what's happening. So for monitoring, of course-- once you are already working on something, building a Google Doc or just, like, bookmarking things. But if you are monitoring breaking news, I find Twitter lists the best and most simple tool." "O.K., sorry, just trying to figure out another good question that follows on from that. How can we investigate journalism and help face the wave of misinformation we see in the contemporary Western world? This is from Andre on YouTube. Any takers for that?" "Big question." "Pretty existential question in terms of AI." "It comes back to sort of what I said at the beginning. You know, you just have to question everything. And that's especially important I think with visuals. Errol Morris wrote a really great book. It's titled 'Believing Is Seeing.' So it sort of reverses the standard saying of seeing is believing. So once you see a visual, it's very easy to fall into a trap. It's like, I'm expecting something very specific to happen in country X and you see a visual that matches that expectation. It's too simple to believe it and be very uncritical about it, right? And that's sort of like at the core of misinformation. Everything you see that's being put out by governments or by private entities, you have to question it. And don't rely just on one source. So if you see a piece of information, do your own research what else is out there, maybe a different viewpoint. What's the context of this piece of information? Is this maybe a story that has been already put out there and has been debunked already and it's just a conspiracy theory that's being recycled because that happens a lot, I think. So I think what you want to do as investigative journalist, you use the principles of good journalism and of investigative journalism, and you project it onto a topic like misinformation. I think that's the key thing. So be critical and review every single piece of information that you see, no matter if it's official or if it's a statement." "A question from Michael from Chicago. What editing tools do you use? Barbara is the only editor among us. We work with several other editors on the video team-- Caroline Kim, Natalie Reneau, and Dimitri Khavin, and many others. But do you want to give it a go?" "Just simple Adobe Premiere for editing. And I don't do graphics, but our graphic designers use After Effects. That's it." "Yeah, very straightforward. And Cinema 4G and some of these other tools as well allow us to sort of manipulate media and that can be useful. Adobe Audition, as well. I remember using that for trying to make sense of the Las Vegas shooting and reconstruct that timeline. And it was the audio signature of every burst of fire, as awful as that was, was distinct. You could see a spike in the audio files for every crack of the bullet. And with multiple video files, you could line those bursts of fire up and rebuild the entire sequence of events, and then examine it from multiple different angles because you had overlapping videos taken at different places. Horrible, horrible event, but the technical examination of the audio files on Audition was the key there to unlocking how all of that footage came together." "Which is something that you can do in Premiere as well. It's just Audition can be a bit more specific, but you can also do it in Premiere." "In Audition, a little tool in Audition-- maybe you can do in Premiere as well-- is that you could mark every crack and you could export that in each of the videos, so to get, say, like one of the things that we reported was a bullet count from those videos. And because depending on the position of the camera, for instance, it might pick up a ricochet or something like that, we needed to do it with multiple videos. And what you could do is you could mark in Audition every spike, and then export all of those into an Excel spreadsheet. And like, one video might have 83 spikes, another one might have 85, and so like it's approximately in around the 84 mark or whatever. Morgan on YouTube-- what are your thoughts on Bellingcat and how did you think you differ? Christiaan--" "Am I the right person to ask? [INAUDIBLE] "Christiaan worked at Bellingcat before he came here." "Yeah. No, I think obviously, there's a lot of overlap. We are heavily reliant on open-source investigation. And obviously, that's to the core of what Bellingcat does. I think maybe two of the main differences I personally have experience is that Bellingcat is really focused on open sources. And we do that here too, but we combine it with traditional ways of reporting. And open-source investigation can reveal a lot, but in certain instances, it only is a lead. And it leads you somewhere, but you will need to go on the ground, for example, in the case of Gaza, or you will need to talk to a source that may have more information. Now, I think that's one of the main differences. The second main difference I think is the way we tell the story. So that's similar to what Christoph earlier said about working with a human rights organization like Amnesty International, where you are basically just putting out every little detail that you can find. Anything with Bellingcat is also, like, explaining every detail in writing. Now, this results in really long reports. And obviously, what we do here is really thinking about, O.K., how can we tell this story to a bigger audience? What are the key things in this investigation? And for me personally, that's really nice to experience. Like I said earlier in the introduction, like I don't consider myself a good writer, but it is really nice to learn, O.K., if we did this really detailed investigation, we zoomed in to like the smallest details we could find, but how do we zoom out again and use some of those details to tell this way bigger story? And that's really exciting. But as Malachy mentioned, in some investigations, there's still overlap, right? We compare notes, have a shout out to each other, and so on. But I'm interested to hear from the rest of the team what the team thinks if there's anything." "Well, Bellingcat, they're brilliant. Eliot and the crew, they're excellent. And you know, we've collaborated on a number of different stories. And you know, they've informed us and you know them very well and stuff. They can respond much more quickly, I think, than we can typically to events and to stories. And so I mean, they're great." "Oh, I'm sorry. Can I do one more point? Because I now remember one third big thing for me is indeed, we will also take a lot of time to get something out usually, while also when we have another revelation, like a big revelation, we may decide 9 out of 10 stories or maybe 95 out of 100 things we're investigating may not end up as a publication. And I think with Bellingcat, it's indeed like, hey, we don't have any revelation, but we want to investigate this. This is what we found. We still don't know everything, but here is all there is. Let's give it to the community and see what can be done with it. And that's, I think, of course, different with a major publication like the 'New York Times,' where we want to bring a story that has an end to it as well." "I think one thing as well about the Bellingcat posts and stories are that you can learn a lot from the technical-- they talk about the reporting in there. And so as case studies for anybody who's interested in this stuff, that's great. We try to be transparent and educational almost in stories that we do too, but I think there's so much technical detail in there that it can be useful for that as well. PepeJpeg on YouTube-- if you had the opportunity to redo any of your investigations, what cases would you reinvestigate and how would you do it differently?" "Cool." "That's a good question." "I mean, you've seen several of the investigations. Do you want to talk about that?" "Pepe with the tough question. I hope this isn't a cop-out because I don't think I would redo any of the investigations we worked on. Hopefully, my editor agrees with that. But I think all of us-- I think I can speak for all of us especially that worked on the Syria Idlib investigations that, you know, we just wanted to do more. I mean, especially in the last month, we've seen 800,000 people flee. Some really horrific things are happening there. And a lot of people have stopped paying attention to Syria. And I know we all feel really passionate about it and want to just do more. And there's like a hunger to just investigate every single horrific thing that happens. And so I think the work that we've done has been incredible, and really moved the story along, and brought about accountability, but you know, I think we would all just like to do one a day if we could. But I don't think I would redo any of the ones that we've done because I think they're stellar work." "Yeah, I think one that we did update, which is difficult to do sometimes, was the Iran crash one because we put out a reconstruction of the seven minutes of that flight with everything that we knew. And it's interesting, like I mean, we suspected that there were two missiles that had hit it, but we just couldn't confirm it. We suspected that because, you know, we had Evan talk to the source who uploaded the video of one missile strike. And of course, the question that we had for him is why were you filming it at that time? And he said, oh, I heard an explosion about a half a minute before that, so I just started filming and it sounded weird. And we knew from the flight path, and the speed of the plane, and from that video where it was hit. And that was probably around 25 seconds approximately away from where the last transponder was hit. And so the theory was, well, the first explosion that he's talking about might have taken out the transponder. And our sources in Washington were also getting information from their intel sources that there were two infrared blips picked up in Iran and that two missiles were launched in that minute. And so we had that, you know, sort of human intel information. And then there was also the CCTV that showed the missile being launched-- what ended up being the second missile. And in that CCTV, you could also see that the car alarms in certain cars were already flashing. And so the question was well, what put those off? Probably, a first explosion because the second one definitely put more of the cars off as well. And so although we had all of this information, we didn't put it into the first version of the story. And then, you know, Giancarlo, who's one of the Bellingcat crew, was the first to share video of two missiles being launched. And that was an incredible open crowdsourcing effort to try to verify that video. And Evan, who was here earlier on, through Logan Mitchell, one of the people that we work with on a freelance basis, were able to confirm the location of that, and in fact, that it showed the two missiles. And so we went back and updated that video, and we have a more complete picture now of it. You can watch that on YouTube. One last closing question. I suppose it's the best one. How can people submit tips? What's the best way to reach out to you? What piece of advice do you have for young journalists wanting to start open-source investigations? So let's start with how you can submit tips and how you can reach out to us. Christoph?" "So there are various ways. So we all have Twitter. We're very active on Twitter, so that is a great way to reach out to us personally. We love to communicate on Twitter, so half of our day is hanging out on Twitter and the other half is Google Earth. So please reach out to us there. We have also set up official ways to reach out to us. So the 'New York Times' in general has a tip line that you can find on the website, where you can also submit in a very secure way, very specific tips through Signal, WhatsApp, email, and I think there's a secure box as well where you can drop information as well. So there really are various ways. We also have an email address, as far as I know." "Nytimes.com/tips is where you can find all of that." "/tips." "Nytimes.com/tips-- sorry, slash tips-- is where you can find all of that. What piece of advice do you have for young journalists wanting to start open-source investigations?" "That's an easy one." "I mean, find something you are passionate about and just try to find out as much as you can. It can be the Iran crash, for example. And before you know, you may have a Twitter account, and you do find something that is interesting, and you just tweet it out, or you tag some other journalist, or people at Bellingcat, or Storyful, whatever. I think that's a real good way. Like be passionate about it, right? Like find something you're really interested in. And it's almost like a puzzle. I remember when we were doing the Iran crash story, some of the colleagues here in the video department were like, wow, I mean, the topic is so horrific, but we want to get to the facts. We want to know what happened. But the process almost feels like a puzzle, like memory or spot the differences. There's a great account on Twitter called quiztime, where people upload every day, a photo or an audio file. And that account is meant to introduce people to open-source investigations and to see in a fun way. These are not like horrific, potential crimes that are happening, but just someone's holiday picture and you need to find out where is that photo taken. And I think what comes to the core to that as well speaking for me personally, but I think also for everyone here and we haven't really talked about it is that this is really teamwork. You will see for all the stories we do, there's loads of people being involved. I don't think any of the stuff we're doing here can be done alone. And that's us, as a team, but it's also you as a wider community on YouTube, on Twitter. And I think that's something to keep in mind when you want to get started. Like hey, reach out for people and help on Twitter, for example. And yeah, have fun with doing this, I would say." "A plug for the work, it's on youtube.com/nytimes. There's a playlist of all of the visual investigations. You can subscribe to that, subscribe to the channel. We're always in the comments answering questions about specific investigations. And we'll be in the comments answering any questions that you have arising from this video, which will stay up on the YouTube account as well. So thanks for tuning in. Thanks for the questions and send us your tips."
B1 中級 紐約時報》如何進行視覺調查|紐約時報 (How The Times Makes Visual Investigations | NYTimes) 7 0 林宜悉 發佈於 2021 年 01 月 14 日 更多分享 分享 收藏 回報 影片單字