 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 7/21/2011 17:33, Stephen wrote:
> On 21/07/2011 6:51 PM, Darren New wrote:
>> http://www.theonion.com/articles/phone-hack-whistleblower-found-dead,20976/
>>
>> I'm still giggling.
>>
> I don't see what's funny unless you mean the comment by Josh Wright
That's exactly what I'm referring to, yes.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
"Coding without comments is like
driving without turn signals."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 22/07/2011 4:48 AM, Darren New wrote:
> On 7/21/2011 17:33, Stephen wrote:
>> On 21/07/2011 6:51 PM, Darren New wrote:
>>> http://www.theonion.com/articles/phone-hack-whistleblower-found-dead,20976/
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm still giggling.
>>>
>> I don't see what's funny unless you mean the comment by Josh Wright
>
> That's exactly what I'm referring to, yes.
>
Phew! That's all right then. You are still up there in my opinion. :-)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New <dne### [at] san rrcom> wrote:
> http://www.theonion.com/articles/phone-hack-whistleblower-found-dead,20976/
> I'm still giggling.
I don't really understand it. It seems to be referencing something, but
I don't know what.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 7/22/2011 5:36, Stephen wrote:
> On 22/07/2011 4:48 AM, Darren New wrote:
>> On 7/21/2011 17:33, Stephen wrote:
>>> On 21/07/2011 6:51 PM, Darren New wrote:
>>>> http://www.theonion.com/articles/phone-hack-whistleblower-found-dead,20976/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'm still giggling.
>>>>
>>> I don't see what's funny unless you mean the comment by Josh Wright
>>
>> That's exactly what I'm referring to, yes.
>>
>
> Phew! That's all right then. You are still up there in my opinion. :-)
>
Well, it *is* the Onion, you know. You're aware it's a comedy
magazine/newspaper/whatever? And that it's always the same three people they
ask for an opinion?
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
"Coding without comments is like
driving without turn signals."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 7/22/2011 8:09, Warp wrote:
> Darren New<dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>> http://www.theonion.com/articles/phone-hack-whistleblower-found-dead,20976/
>
>> I'm still giggling.
>
> I don't really understand it. It seems to be referencing something, but
> I don't know what.
>
http://yesbuthowever.com/two-murdoch-whistleblowers-dead-5000943/
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
"Coding without comments is like
driving without turn signals."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 22/07/2011 5:14 PM, Darren New wrote:
> Well, it *is* the Onion, you know. You're aware it's a comedy
> magazine/newspaper/whatever?
Yes, but I wasn't paying attention
> And that it's always the same three people they ask for an opinion?
No, I didn't
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 22-7-2011 18:19, Darren New wrote:
> On 7/22/2011 8:09, Warp wrote:
>> Darren New<dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>>> http://www.theonion.com/articles/phone-hack-whistleblower-found-dead,20976/
>>>
>>
>>> I'm still giggling.
>>
>> I don't really understand it. It seems to be referencing something, but
>> I don't know what.
>>
I prefer Lynn Scott's answer, as it is more subtle and more disturbing.
> http://yesbuthowever.com/two-murdoch-whistleblowers-dead-5000943/
What is yesbuthowever for kind of a source? Never heard of it.
I am a bit worried by 'The police were involved, as evidenced by the
resignation of two of Scotland Yard’s top cops.' That is OK in a blog,
where you just express opinions without any guarantee that you checked
your facts. Layout of these pages suggests however, that it is trying to
come across as a journalistic medium. In that case that bullet-point
should have been something like: 'The were rumours that police were
involved. This led to the resignation of two of Scotland Yard’s top
cops.' The difference being that they resigned because of the rumours
and not because of anything they did. They might have done something,
but that has not been proved yet. That the vast majority of the people
believe they are guilty is also no evidence at all.
His biographical data mentions: 'He also is a political correspondent
for BBC Radio London.', so he should have known better. Then again he
does not claim to have any training in law or journalism, that might
explain something.
Or he might just imitate Murdoch style journalism as a tongue in cheek.
--
Apparently you can afford your own dictator for less than 10 cents per
citizen per day.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 7/23/2011 0:52, andrel wrote:
> What is yesbuthowever for kind of a source? Never heard of it.
Me neither. It was just the first one I found while googling.
Unfortunately the cream pie kind of pushed anything more relevant off the
front pages for a while, so it was surprisingly hard to come up with sear
ch
terms.
> 'The were rumours that police were involved. This led to the
> resignation of two of Scotland Yard’s top cops.'
Well, no. Murdoch was tapping phones by paying the police to do it for hi
m.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
"Coding without comments is like
driving without turn signals."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 23-7-2011 19:10, Darren New wrote:
> On 7/23/2011 0:52, andrel wrote:
>> What is yesbuthowever for kind of a source? Never heard of it.
>
> Me neither. It was just the first one I found while googling.
Seems fair. Still: blog or news source?
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/europe/2011/07/2011718201941133707.html
http://edition.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/europe/07/19/uk.phone.hacking.hoare/index.html
> Unfortunately the cream pie kind of pushed anything more relevant off
> the front pages for a while, so it was surprisingly hard to come up with
> search terms.
Here it was just a very small sideline, then again we don't have any
Murdoch financed 'news' media here. I can imagine that a channel like
Fox used it to make a victim out of Murdoch, even to such an extend that
more serious papers had to follow.
>> 'There were rumours that police were involved. This led to the
>> resignation of two of Scotland Yard’s top cops.'
>
> Well, no. Murdoch was tapping phones by paying the police to do it for him.
Murdoch himself certainly wasn't. The police have been accused of taking
briberies, but that has not been proved as far as I know. I might have
not completely followed the story, but it generally is about hacking not
tapping. I can not remember seeing a direct claim that police was
tapping phones and passing the data to the NotW or any other Murdoch paper.
Anyway, the two policemen resigned because their position was untenable
because there was widespread doubt about their loyalty and professional
conduct. But, and that is the point, their resignation does not prove
anything other than their ability to understand the inevitable. You can
claim otherwise, but a journalist can't, because it implies they are
guilty *because* there is a suspicion. That violates the 'innocent until
proven guilty' principle.
--
Apparently you can afford your own dictator for less than 10 cents per
citizen per day.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 7/23/2011 11:10, andrel wrote:
> On 23-7-2011 19:10, Darren New wrote:
>> On 7/23/2011 0:52, andrel wrote:
>>> What is yesbuthowever for kind of a source? Never heard of it.
>>
>> Me neither. It was just the first one I found while googling.
>
> Seems fair. Still: blog or news source?
>
> http://english.aljazeera.net/news/europe/2011/07/2011718201941133707.ht
ml
> http://edition.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/europe/07/19/uk.phone.hacking.hoare/i
ndex.html
Yeah. At that moment, all the Murdoch news was about the cream pie. I did
n't
feel like spending a lot of time trying to come up with a more profession
al
news source just because someone said "I don't know what you're talking
about." :-)
> Here it was just a very small sideline, then again we don't have any Mu
rdoch
> financed 'news' media here. I can imagine that a channel like Fox used
it to
> make a victim out of Murdoch, even to such an extend that more serious
> papers had to follow.
Basically.
>>> 'There were rumours that police were involved. This led to the
>>> resignation of two of Scotland Yard’s top cops.'
>>
>> Well, no. Murdoch was tapping phones by paying the police to do it for
him.
>
> Murdoch himself certainly wasn't. The police have been accused of takin
g
> briberies, but that has not been proved as far as I know. I might have
not
> completely followed the story, but it generally is about hacking not
> tapping.
Some of it was hacking, like to get the voicemail. Some of it was
specifically tapping, if I read it correctly.
> Anyway, the two policemen resigned because their position was untenable
> because there was widespread doubt about their loyalty and professional
> conduct.
Fair enough.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
"Coding without comments is like
driving without turn signals."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
