15 December 2010.
A representative of The Bureau of Public Investigation, name withheld by request, telephoned John Young to explain what "production costs" entail, principally for producing film based on the Wikileaks material.
The final cost of the production exceeded funds raised and required funding from persons involved. If necessary proof of expenditures will be provided.
No payment was asked for access to the Wikileaks material. The Wikileaks material was not offered, only the film production.
No payment of funds was made to Wikileaks or Julian Assange.
The amounts stated in the source quote are inaccurate. BBC was not involved. "BBC might sue." The last statement was later withdrawn upon being questioned as a threat.
Association with Wikileaks has been very stressful due to inappropriate accusations.
15 December 2010. Update:
Cryptome.org has an account of what was asked from a major media outlet for payment, NDA and bond to assure deal compliance for access to Wikileaks files. The media outlet is an international organization headquartered in New York City which does not wish to be identified. In one instance this was said to be the arrangement:
"An intermediary asked for $100k for 'production costs.' We declined. We investigated but could not prove the money was to go to Julian Assange or Wikileaks. It seems a British public interest production company produced news pieces for BBC and Channel 4 based on access to the material. Al Jazeera paid 60k British pounds. BBC paid 100k, Channel 4 160k. Again, we couldn't prove any of it went to Assange."
Is The Bureau of Public Investigation the public production company referenced or did you work with the company? If so, can you confirm the arrangement described? If not, could you suggest a candidate?
This will be published on Cryptome.org.
15 December 2010
Pay Wikileaks to Play
Cryptome has a firm account of what Wikileaks asked from a major media outlet for payment, NDA and bond to assure deal compliance for access to the Cablegate files.
Former Wikileakers are said to be shopping disclosure of this and other deals.
A slew of news outlets around the world are reporting there were solicited, with alluring samples, some agreed, some refused. Not a few checked with their governments before replying.
Whether there was a cost-sharing between the NY Times and The Guardian is worth probing as this unfolds, and as ever, the NYT checking with the USG for guidance.
Cryptome is polling to learn more about this, in confidence if preferred, but for publication on Cryptome.
Are you able to reveal this type of information concerning your organization? CNN has said in public it refused to agree to such a deal. So too WSJ, I believe. However, whether those statements are true or a cover is intriguing.
"No reputable media pay for information." Hmm.