Subtitles section Play video
"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."