Gabrielle Reilly:  Tell us about your book "Mafiaboy" (both you and Michael Calce are hot btw) and what attracted you to write the book?

Craig Silverman:  Aw, shucks. Mike and I thank you.

The book is the story of Mafiaboy, the teenage Canadian hacker who launched massive online attacks in 2000. I think many people recall the sense of panic that erupted after CNN, Yahoo!, eBay, Amazon and other major online properties were temporarily knocked offline that year. It was major news, and the Attorney General of the time declared that her office would aggressively pursue those responsible. After a lengthy investigation, the RCMP and FBI apprehended Michal Calce, a 15 year-old kid in Montreal. He eventually plead guilty to a litany of offenses and then kind of disappeared from the radar, never having spoken a word in public or to the press. This book is his story of what he did, and it's also a look at how online crime has gotten worse over the last nine years. I worked with him to tell his story. The book will be published in the US in July, and is already out in Canada.

I spent several years writing about the Internet and technology and at one point left journalism to work at an Internet security company. I was at my desk when his attacks unfolded in 2000. I've always been interested in the story, especially because I live in Montreal. Even though his actions took place nine years ago, his story continues to be relevant because there hasn't been a similar assault on Internet giants, and because his story helps explain how a typical suburban kid can get so caught up in hacking. The Internet has grown by leaps and bounds since then, but many of the same vulnerabilities still exist. Thanks to online banking and other services, the average person is now more at risk than ever before, so it was important for me to work on a project that helps offer advice to the average person about how they can stay secure when online.

Gabrielle Reilly:  What's next for you?

Craig Silverman:  I'm working on another book idea and hope it can be on shelves within the next couple of years. Apart from that, I write a weekly column about errors and accuracy for Columbia Journalism Review online and contribute to several magazines and newspapers. And, of course, I continue to publish on Regret the Error five days a week.

Craig Silverman:  The site launched in October 2004. My idea was to showcase the best of the worst of media errors and corrections, and to report on trends regarding press accuracy and corrections. The site attracted about 10,000 people that first day, so I immediately realized I would need to spend a lot of time on it.

 
Gabrielle Reilly:  Can you tell me about the success of your site?

Craig Silverman:  One of the successes of the site is that it has made some journalists and media organizations think about accuracy and corrections. I've been reasonably effective at raising the issue and communicating the importance of accuracy and corrections. I've heard from journalists all over the world. They ask for advice about correcting a specific error, preventing mistakes, handling errors online etc. I'm always thrilled to offer help and advice, but my hope is that we as a profession can come together to find ways to raise our standards and share knowledge. That's when we'll see a real impact.

Gabrielle Reilly:  What news error reported in the last five years do you think has caused the most damage internationally?

Craig Silverman:  The mistake that comes to mind is Newsweek's report that U.S. soldiers may have desecrated the Koran -- and perhaps even flushed it down a toilet -- during interrogations. This mistake had several notable aspects to it. The story, published in May 2005, was very short. It cited an anonymous source, which is always of concern, especially when the claim is so inflammatory. The magazine did attempt to confirm the story by contacting two Defense Department officials to see if they had any objections to the report. The officials didn't raise any specific objections, so the magazine went to print. Once published, it set off a wave of controversy. Some questioned the claim, others used the report to inflame tensions and question Newsweek's standards and objectivity. The White House Press secretary demanded a retraction. Newspapers in Pakistan and Afghanistan re-reported the story and used it to generate outrage against the U.S.  This outrage, which to be fair was not solely based on the Newsweek report, eventually spurred on riots that killed up to 15 people. After initially refusing, Newsweek eventually retracted the report. This error included several notable elements: the anonymous sourcing, the magazine's initial refusal to retract the article after it couldn't find other sources to bolster its report, the way the report was used as a political and rhetorical football, and finally, the result that no one really knows where the report came from or if did in fact have a sliver of truth.

Gabrielle Reilly:  What measures were taken to correct the story?

Craig Silverman:  This is an important element of the Newsweek episode. The magazine initially offered the typical "we stand by our reporting" response in an Editor's Note. But Newsweek's editor also apologized in case they had  ".got any part of our story wrong..." So at that point it was clear that they didn't know what was true and what was false. Yet they refused to retract the story. They finally caved and issued a one sentence retraction: "Based on what we know now, we are retracting our original story that an internal military investigation had uncovered Koran abuse at Guantanamo Bay."