Tabloid phone hacking scandal involving kidnapped girl roils Britain

Started by jimmy olsen, July 05, 2011, 07:08:43 PM

Previous topic - Next topic
Print
Go Down Pages 1 ... 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 ... 21
User actions

jimmy olsen

#150
July 13, 2011, 06:25:41 PM
Several Senators have called for an investigation on the 9/11 hacking claims.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jul/13/us-senators-phone-hacking-inquiry
It is far better for the truth to tear my flesh to pieces, then for my soul to wander through darkness in eternal damnation.

Jet: So what kind of woman is she? What's Julia like?
Faye: Ordinary. The kind of beautiful, dangerous ordinary that you just can't leave alone.
Jet: I see.
Faye: Like an angel from the underworld. Or a devil from Paradise.
--------------------------------------------
1 Karma Chameleon point

Neil

#151
July 13, 2011, 09:42:02 PM
Maybe he's keeping Brooks around so he can sacrifice her at the appropriate time.  After all, the scandal hasn't blown itself out yet.
I do not hate you, nor do I love you, but you are made out of atoms which I can use for something else.

Neil

#152
July 13, 2011, 09:42:54 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on July 13, 2011, 06:25:41 PM
Several Senators have called for an investigation on the 9/11 hacking claims.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jul/13/us-senators-phone-hacking-inquiry
Of course they are.  There are few people more loathsome than US Senators.
I do not hate you, nor do I love you, but you are made out of atoms which I can use for something else.

Martinus

#153
July 14, 2011, 03:29:45 AM
Quote from: Neil on July 13, 2011, 09:42:54 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on July 13, 2011, 06:25:41 PM
Several Senators have called for an investigation on the 9/11 hacking claims.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jul/13/us-senators-phone-hacking-inquiry
Of course they are.  There are few people more loathsome than US Senators.
These few people include Murdoch and Rebekah Brook, though,

Martinus

#154
July 14, 2011, 03:29:19 PM
So, Murdoch said that he will accede to the summons from the Parliament (after originally sending a fuck you letter) after they threatened to charge him with the contempt of the parliament, and now FBI has started a separate investigation.

Fuck, I may start to believe in God again.  :lol:

crazy canuck

#155
July 14, 2011, 03:44:41 PM
What kind of chilling effect is this going to have on investigative journalism - to the extent that even exists anymore?

Neil

#156
July 14, 2011, 03:53:01 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 14, 2011, 03:29:45 AM
Quote from: Neil on July 13, 2011, 09:42:54 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on July 13, 2011, 06:25:41 PM
Several Senators have called for an investigation on the 9/11 hacking claims.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jul/13/us-senators-phone-hacking-inquiry
Of course they are.  There are few people more loathsome than US Senators.
These few people include Murdoch and Rebekah Brook, though,
They haven't really done anything that bad.
I do not hate you, nor do I love you, but you are made out of atoms which I can use for something else.

Martinus

#157
July 14, 2011, 03:53:38 PM
These are tabloids not investigative journalism outlets. In fact a lot of it was brought to light because of investigative journalism from the Guardian.

Razgovory

#158
July 14, 2011, 04:47:23 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on July 14, 2011, 03:44:41 PM
What kind of chilling effect is this going to have on investigative journalism - to the extent that even exists anymore?

Probably the same chilling effect it would have on bribery.
I've given it serious thought. I must scorn the ways of my family, and seek a Japanese woman to yield me my progeny. He shall live in the lands of the east, and be well tutored in his sacred trust to weave the best traditions of Japan and the Sacred South together, until such time as he (or, indeed his house, which will periodically require infusion of both Southern and Japanese bloodlines of note) can deliver to the South it's independence, either in this world or in space.  -Lettow April of 2011

Raz is right. -MadImmortalMan March of 2017

crazy canuck

#159
July 14, 2011, 05:04:53 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on July 14, 2011, 04:47:23 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on July 14, 2011, 03:44:41 PM
What kind of chilling effect is this going to have on investigative journalism - to the extent that even exists anymore?

Probably the same chilling effect it would have on bribery.

Not sure about that.  It wasnt until recently that investigative reporters were lauded for doing whatever was necessary to break the big story.  Now Marti is quite right that the papers in question are tabloids but to what extent are genuine investigative reporters going to make sure they do not cross lines of acceptability in pursuit of stories were there is a genuine public interest.

crazy canuck

#160
July 14, 2011, 05:05:49 PM
Quote from: Martinus on July 14, 2011, 03:53:38 PM
These are tabloids not investigative journalism outlets.

Ok but protections of a free press only go to those we think are worthy?  Seems a difficult concept.

grumbler

#161
July 14, 2011, 05:47:54 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on July 14, 2011, 05:05:49 PM
Ok but protections of a free press only go to those we think are worthy?  Seems a difficult concept.
What protections of free press allow journalists to break the law?  This doesn't seem a difficult concept at all.
The future is all around us, waiting, in moments of transition, to be born in moments of revelation. No one knows the shape of that future or where it will take us. We know only that it is always born in pain.   -G'Kar

Bayraktar!

Barrister

#162
July 14, 2011, 05:55:35 PM
Quote from: grumbler on July 14, 2011, 05:47:54 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on July 14, 2011, 05:05:49 PM
Ok but protections of a free press only go to those we think are worthy?  Seems a difficult concept.
What protections of free press allow journalists to break the law?  This doesn't seem a difficult concept at all.

Well journalists will frequently refuse to answer questions under oath in order to "protect their sources", when such priviledge is given little to no legal protection.
Posts here are my own private opinions.  I do not speak for my employer.

DontSayBanana

#163
July 14, 2011, 05:58:33 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on July 14, 2011, 05:05:49 PM
Ok but protections of a free press only go to those we think are worthy?  Seems a difficult concept.

The freedom to run any story they like?  That's not at issue.  The issue is the (probably) systematic invasions of privacy to get information for those stories- that was never protected in the first place.  They broke laws in the pursuit of a scoop, got caught, and some are trying to blur this into a press freedoms issue, when it is and always has been an ethics (or lack thereof) issue.
Experience bij!

Capetan Mihali

#164
July 14, 2011, 06:16:43 PM
Quote from: Barrister on July 14, 2011, 05:55:35 PM
Well journalists will frequently refuse to answer questions under oath in order to "protect their sources", when such priviledge is given little to no legal protection.

I seem to remember people getting prison sentences for doing that in the US...
"The internet's completely over. [...] The internet's like MTV. At one time MTV was hip and suddenly it became outdated. Anyway, all these computers and digital gadgets are no good. They just fill your head with numbers and that can't be good for you."
-- Prince, 2010. (R.I.P.)
Print
Go Up Pages 1 ... 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 ... 21
User actions