The New York Times recently published a harrowing account of a man who was abducted and sold to a Chinese gang after applying for a translator job in Thailand. The man, known as Neo for his nickname inspired by the Matrix movies, spoke to the Times on the condition of anonymity due to fear of retribution from the criminals. However, the Times inadvertently revealed identifying information about him, including what appears to be his passport number.
The Times had published several photos provided by Neo, which showcased his time at the scam work camp. Among these photos was a visa page that displayed his passport number alongside travel visa information. Although the photo did not include Neo’s full name, it potentially exposed him to the Chinese gangsters who held him hostage.
The photo was not included in the online version of the article but was accessible through its specific web address on the Times website. After being alerted by The Intercept, the Times promptly removed the photo from its public website. The newspaper stated that they removed the photo out of caution and within 24 hours of publication. They also mentioned that the source was aware of the situation and had not raised concerns.
The revelation of Neo’s passport number could be dangerous as the gangs often confiscate abductees’ passports and let their visas expire. This means that the gang may have access to Neo’s passport information, further jeopardizing his safety.
In addition to the passport photo, other images not intended for public consumption were also removed from the Times website after The Intercept brought them to their attention. These images included a graphic photo of scars on Neo’s body and a snippet of a text message conversation between the gang and Neo’s parents regarding the ransom demanded for his release.
The availability of these unused assets is not uncommon and has been observed in various industries, including video game development and non-governmental organizations. However, it is crucial for newsrooms to exercise discretion when handling sensitive materials entrusted to them by at-risk sources.
This is not the first time the New York Times has unintentionally revealed personally identifiable information about story subjects. In a previous incident, the Times exposed the phone numbers of Russian soldiers and their family members who were critical of Vladimir Putin and the war effort. The Times later removed the news story from the website archival service, the Wayback Machine, and has been resistant to having its site archived.
While software developers have automated tools to scan their source code for sensitive information, there is no substitute for human discretion in journalism. Journalists must be cautious when handling sensitive materials to protect the safety and privacy of their sources.
In conclusion, the New York Times inadvertently revealed identifying information about a man who was trafficked by a Chinese gang. The newspaper published a photo that displayed what appeared to be his passport number, potentially exposing him to further harm. The Times promptly removed the photo and other sensitive images from its website after being alerted by The Intercept. This incident highlights the importance of exercising caution and discretion when handling sensitive materials in journalism.