Because the sender’s account had been registered anonymously, investigators had to use forensic techniques — including a check of what other e-mail accounts had been accessed from the same computer address — to identify who was writing the e-mails.
Eventually they identified Ms. Broadwell as a prime suspect and obtained access to her regular e-mail account. In its in-box, they discovered intimate and sexually explicit e-mails from another account that also was not immediately identifiable. Investigators eventually ascertained that it belonged to Mr. Petraeus and studied the possibility that someone had hacked into Mr. Petraeus’s account or was posing as him to send the explicit messages.
Eventually they determined that Mr. Petraeus had indeed sent the messages to Ms. Broadwell and concluded that the two had had an affair.
How The FBI Uncovered the Petraeus Affair
Just so you know— your anonymous email account ain’t anonymous at all.
(via The New York Times)
Yesterday, the New York Times took on New York City’s Health Department over a potentially misleading ad. The ad, shown above, and portrays an obese man with an amputated leg (ostensibly due to his weight induced diabetes), and is meant to urge New Yorkers to eat less. But, as the Times points out, the man featured in the picture is not an amputee at all. His leg was amputated, reports the Times, not by a doctor but by photoshop.
City bigwig (boy, do I love that phrase) Howard Wolfson took issue with the fact that the times felt compelled to write about this false portrayal and took to Twitter looking for a confrontation. He got one, courtesy of Times’ Metro Editor Carolyn Ryan.
I thought it would be interesting to post the Twitter spat in one place, so here it is. Do you agree with Ryan, who says the Health Department derives its power from the perception that the victims in its ads are real. Or, do you agree with Wolfson, who argues that since the correlation between sugar drinks and obesity and diabetes is a fact, it’s ok to portray it any way the City wants.
Not an easy question, but an interesting debate if you ask me.
Still waiting for @NYTMetro to answer if folks in Times ads are actors and if they are whether that says anything about the product/message.— howard wolfson (@howiewolf) January 25, 2012
. @carolynryan story was more focused on ads integrity than efficacy - yet correlation btwn sugar drinks and obesity/diabetes is a fact— howard wolfson (@howiewolf) January 25, 2012
@howiewolf Of course. The photo suggests- vividly - if you drink soda, you lose your leg. Turned out city-not diabetes-sawed off guy’s leg.— carolynryan (@carolynryan) January 25, 2012
My grandmother lost a leg to diabetes.She would not have appeared in an ad. Doesn’t make her loss less real to have it depicted by another— howard wolfson (@howiewolf) January 25, 2012
Being on TV implies sitting in front of a camera. That sounds contradictory to my work, which is being out somewhere, and writing, and traveling… plus, I am a child of the radio generation; I still think TV is on a tryout.
A Legend Retires
“This is a column about a column” wrote legendary New York Times sports columnist George Vecsey in his farewell to the paper this December. The column, a retrospective looking back at Vecsey’s career and favorite stories, is touching and well written. A subsequent Q&A with blogger Bill Lucey is equally worthwhile.
In the Q&A, Vecsey opens up about how the 24 hour news cycle influences his work: ”Somebody always wants your copy for the Web. So you rush,” and doles out advice to aspring young journalists: ”Seriously? Minor in something else.”
I particularly like the quote above which is a response to a question asking why he’s done very few television interviews. “I would quickly add” says Vecsey, “that I have had a mild case of stage fright.”
Read the full interview on Lucey’s blog.
Thanks go out to Poynter and Jim Romenesko for pointing me to the Q&A.