Advertisement
Not a member of Pastebin yet?
Sign Up,
it unlocks many cool features!
- On Monday February 27th, 2012, WikiLeaks began publishing The Global Intelligence Files, over five million e-mails from the Texas headquartered "global intelligence" company Stratfor. The e-mails date between July 2004 and late December 2011. They reveal the inner workings of a company that fronts as an intelligence publisher, but provides confidential intelligence services to large corporations, such as Bhopal's Dow Chemical Co., Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon and government agencies, including the US Department of Homeland Security, the US Marines and the US Defence Intelligence Agency. The emails show Stratfor's web of informers, pay-off structure, payment laundering techniques and psychological methods.
- [alpha] Insight processing reminder
- Email-ID 282635
- Date 2011-08-11 23:48:03
- From richmond@stratfor.com
- To alpha@stratfor.com
- List-Name alpha@stratfor.com
- Anyone sending insight through to the list needs to remember the new
- coding we have scoring everything on an A-F scale. I am pasting the
- directions again below. Pay particular attention to the directions under
- item credibility.
- Also, Mikey made a good point the other day. Often we will task a source
- asking for feedback on a particular OS piece. When we do that please also
- include the piece being referenced so that it completes the insight.
- Sometimes we don't know what the source is referencing, making it
- confusing.
- Finally, where possible its also a good idea to include the original
- (scrub them where needed) questions for the same reason mentioned above on
- the OS pieces. Where that is not possible and where necessary, please
- give a general idea on the tasking to better understand the sources
- references. Also, when you include the (scrubbed) questions - and again,
- I know that's not always appropriate - it helps others trying to learn the
- sourcing and insight process to learn how we task sources.
- SOURCE: code
- ATTRIBUTION: this is what we should say if we use this info in a
- publication, e.g. STRATFOR source/source in the medical industry/source on
- the ground, etc
- SOURCE DESCRIPTION: this is where we put the more concrete details of the
- source for our internal consumption so we can better understand the
- source's background and ability to make the assessments in the insight.
- PUBLICATION: Yes or no. If you put yes it doesn't mean that we will
- publish it, but only that we can publish it.
- SOURCE RELIABILITY: A-F. A being the best and F being the worst. This
- grades the source overall - access to information, timeliness,
- availability, etc. In short, how good is this source?
- ITEM CREDIBILITY: A-F. A = we can take this info to the bank; B = Good
- insight but maybe not entirely precise; C = Insight is only partially
- true; D = There may be some interest in the insight, but it is mostly
- false or just pure speculation; F = Likely to be disinformation.
- SPECIAL HANDLING: often this is "none" but it may be something like, "if
- you use this we need to be sure not to mention the part about XXX in
- thepublication" or any other special notes
- SOURCE HANDLER: the person who can take follow-up questions and
- communicate with the source
- Remember that you are not limited to only putting down the letter score
- and are encouraged to give insight into WHY you are picking that score. I
- know we are often in a hurry, but this is very helpful for everyone
- understanding biases, uniqueness and other factors that make the insight
- pertinent (or not).
- If there are any questions, please ask.
- Jen
- --
- Jennifer Richmond
- STRATFOR
- China Director
- Director of International Projects
- (512) 422-9335
- richmond@stratfor.com
- www.stratfor.com
Advertisement
Add Comment
Please, Sign In to add comment
Advertisement