“State-of-the-art end-to-end encryption (powered by the open source Signal Protocol) keeps your conversations secure. We can’t read your messages or listen to your calls, and no one else can either. Privacy isn’t an optional mode — it’s just the way that Signal works. Every message, every call, every time.” (Source: Signal website)

If you’re not signed up to the Signal messaging app, then you must be the only visitor in the “need-to-send-undercover-messages” corner of Jerusalem. You are in the majority though. With about 70 million users in 2024, Signal pales in comparison to Apple iPhone’s 1 bilion iMessage users and trembles in the presence of Whatsapp’s 3 billion users. But tremble is actually a gross exaggeration. Signal has never been about the mass market. It’s users go there for one reason alone: assurance of extreme privacy.

The messaging app shot to fame last Monday when the worst nightmare on embarrassment street befell President Trump’s National Security Advisor Michael Waltz. In a group chat that violated the US government’s express policy of not using Signal for national security discussions, Waltz mistakenly added journalist Jeffrey Goldberg to the group earlier this month of March. Other members of the chat were the US Secretary of Defence Pete Hegseth, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, CIA director John Ratcliffe and Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard.

Goldberg didn’t post a waving hand emoji or interject with “hae plis” to let the eminent group know that he was part of the inner circle. He kept quiet and topped up his rapidly cooling cup of coffee. In no time sensitive details of an attack against Houthi rebels in Yemen emerged, including what fighter jets were to be used, types of bombs and missile targets. Goldberg, the Editor-in-Chief of the Atlantic magazine couldn’t believe the gargantuan security cock up. So last Monday he published a piece about the  security breach. The Trump administration fell lock step into their official policy: In the face of adversity do not defend, attack! Goldberg was called all manner of names including “loser” and “sleazebag” by none other than the President himself.

Pete Hegseth, the defence secretary, went as far as to say that the group chat had not been discussing war plans. Well, Goldberg had the receipts and promptly dropped screenshots of the chat which left a lot of scrambled egg on their faces. And, by the way, Goldberg didn’t wait to be thrown out of the group unceremoniously. He casually stood up, slung his jacket over his shoulder and walked out of the chat, leaving chaos and anarchy behind him.

So many corporate lessons here to be learnt. In the first instance, media training is an absolute mandatory induction tool for anyone in senior management. The public relations gurus will tell you that having a microphone thrust into your face as you walk out of an elevator can be discombombulating at the very least, and knowing what to say at a moment’s notice is the difference between a sound byte that goes viral or a story that dies a quick death for lack of sound byte oxygen. Secondly, offense as a defense typically only works when you’re coming from a point of high moral authority. The way Goldberg was viciously attacked verbally made the public wake up and pay attention. Goldberg’s response along the lines of  “Well I didn’t ask to join the chat, I was just put in there” was classic. This was likely an innocent mistake by Waltz, one that can happen to anyone as Whatsapp users who have sent the right message to the wrong person know embarrassingly well. Calling the journalist all manner of epithets just added fuel to the fire and he therefore released some of the messages in defence of himself.

Thirdly, if you have a source, protect their identity to death! The same applies to the protection of whistleblowers. Waltz, just like Jesus’ disciple Peter, denied ever knowing Goldberg despite his number being a saved contact on his phone. “I wouldn’t know him if I bumped into him, if I saw him in a police lineup.” Well, that was to be expected. Goldberg on the other hand took a more professional journalistic ethical path. Admitting to BBC reporter Sarah Smith that they have met several times, he cautiously added,”He can say obviously whatever he wants, but I am not commenting on my relationship or non-relationship. As a reporter, I’m just not comfortable talking publicly about relationships that I may or may not have with people who are news makers.” In other words, next time I write about a White House news story quoting internal sources, it may or may not be a guy called Waltz.

X@Carolmusyoka

The Nitpicker Podcast