Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
Warrahooyaargh
Sep 15, 2007
Oh the mundanity
A video of Piers Morgan explaining phone hacking to Charlotte Church in 2003 has surfaced. How timely!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jKNuiClg_Vc

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

ReindeerF
Apr 20, 2002

Rubber Dinghy Rapids Bro

Zombywuf posted:

The libel laws aren't really that broad and powerful. They're pretty sensible in principle, if you publish some sort of writing that causes harm to a person they can sue. The problem is that some people are much more powerful than others (i.e. richer) and can make a libel case last for years while the other party (plaintif or defendant) bleeds money and is forced to quit. Newspapers have more money than most private citizens so they can get away with just about anything. The damages awarded are rarely punitive so they can just budget for it as operating expenses.

There are some specific complaints with the actual laws, but it's the process of being involved in a libel trial that is the major problem.
Anti-SLAPP laws have done some good work toward curbing this in the US and elsewhere. My experience in parts of the world where there's a weird mix of egregious libel/slander laws and saucy tabloid media indicates that the reason these laws don't migrate is because the people holding the cards like being able to selectively target people they have a beef with using lawsuits. Manifestation of laws on the topic tend, there, to not be so much a matter of public interest as much as a way of exercising control over individuals and the media. Of course I have no idea what the situation in Ukraine is.

Brown Moses posted:

Data analyst at a company that manufactures ladies underwear. I'm literally surrounded by piles of lingerie and photographs of models in bikinis everywhere I look. I went to a meeting today and the table was covered in A4 close up photographs of ladies bosoms. 13 year old me would have gone bright red.
You're like one or two steps from being Ignatius J. Reilly here!

I purposely don't comment in this thread because it's a great resource and I have nothing to add, but I figured this was a good excuse to say thanks for it. I've really learned a ton from following it.

baka kaba
Jul 19, 2003

PLEASE ASK ME, THE SELF-PROFESSED NO #1 PAUL CATTERMOLE FAN IN THE SOMETHING AWFUL S-CLUB 7 MEGATHREAD, TO NAME A SINGLE SONG BY HIS EXCELLENT NU-METAL SIDE PROJECT, SKUA, AND IF I CAN'T PLEASE TELL ME TO
EAT SHIT

Zephro posted:

Well if by "a lot of people" you mean "a few journalists engaged in hilarious special pleading", then sure.

What's really not going to be fun is the liklihood that Cameron is going to bottle the whole thing.

Yeah, if by 'bottle' you mean 'do whatever he wants with no repercussions'. I mean they get a practically free ride as it is, are the media really going to be holding this up against him if he decides in their favour?

Hong XiuQuan
Feb 19, 2008

"Without justice for the Palestinians there will be no peace in the Middle East."
If you watch the first episode of Jonathan Creek, the hack journalist in it uses the technique to access someone's phone mail. That's right - it was so widespread in the 1990s that the producers were probably advised by a journo that this was a technique for every intrepid reporter.

thehustler
Apr 17, 2004

I am very curious about this little crescendo

Hong XiuQuan posted:

If you watch the first episode of Jonathan Creek, the hack journalist in it uses the technique to access someone's phone mail. That's right - it was so widespread in the 1990s that the producers were probably advised by a journo that this was a technique for every intrepid reporter.

Holy poo poo I forgot about that! Also amusing to see both Alistair McGowan and Alan Davies wearing a full Steadicam rig and attempting to look like they knew what they were doing.

Steadicamming is hard.

Sex Vicar
Oct 11, 2007

I thought this was a swingers party...
Graun now going with Cameron set to reject Self-Regulation by PCC and back independent regulation

The Guardian posted:

The government appears set to reject the proposals from the Press Complaints Commission for self-regulation of the newspaper industry and will open the door to a form of regulation that is more independent of the industry.

The issue of whether there should be state underpinning remains unresolved, and there are suggestions from some MPs that Lord Justice Leveson may provide the government with a menu of options when his report is published on Thursday. Leveson was commissioned to examine press standards in the wake of the phone-hacking scandal.

David Cameron in the Commons called on Wednesday for all-party talks on the response to Leveson, but the prime minister's spokesman did not suggest there would be any discussions between the government and the Labour leader Ed Miliband ahead of a Commons statement on Thursday lunchtime.

All the party leaders were in receipt of the report at lunchtime and there will be a meeting of the coalition committee. Six copies were sent to No 10, and Cameron will start reading the report later in the afternoon.

The Liberal Democrat leader and deputy prime minister, Nick Clegg, has also approached the Speaker, John Bercow, to see if it is possible for him to make a statement separate to that of the prime minister. It would be the first time this has happened since the coalition was formed.

It was stressed by Liberal Democrats that they still hoped it would be possible for they and the Conservatives to come to an agreed position, and the approach to the Speaker was a piece of contingency planning.

With rumour swirling on the contents of the report, there were suggestions that Cameron will back a more independent system of regulation than the one proposed by the PCC, which still gives the press a significant influence. Cameron would hope that might be enough to gain the support of Nick Clegg, and secure a combined position, so long as other issues were thrown forward into the context of all party talks.

Oh my. This just got quite interesting :allears:

Zephro
Nov 23, 2000

I suppose I could part with one and still be feared...
If it's not backed by force of law it will be useless, because the papers can just refuse to sign up to it like Richard Desmond.

Total Meatlove
Jan 28, 2007

:japan:
Rangers died, shoujo Hitler cried ;_;

Zephro posted:

If it's not backed by force of law it will be useless, because the papers can just refuse to sign up to it like Richard Desmond.

Which I hope Leveson has underlined in big, bold letters so it can't be ignored/misconstrued.

PiCroft
Jun 11, 2010

I'm sorry, did I break all your shit? I didn't know it was yours

Hugh Grant Takes On The Tabloids is on Channel 4.

E: Holy loving balls I'd completely forgotten about that despicable turd McMullen and how he drove a vulnerable homeless girl to suicide. That poo poo stain should be in prison if there were any justice.

PiCroft fucked around with this message at 21:29 on Nov 28, 2012

Brown Moses
Feb 22, 2002

quote:

Leveson warns Metropolitan police it faces criticism

The Metropolitan police has been formally warned by Lord Justice Leveson that it faces criticism from his inquiry into the force's handling of the phone-hacking scandal and relations with the media.

A letter to the Met says the force's own actions allowed a perception to emerge that certain media organisations were favoured. It has also been warned that senior officers were encouraged to be close to the media over many years.

Several past and serving officers have been told that the inquiry is minded to criticise them over their actions and decision-making during the first phone-hacking investigation in 2006, and then a decision to refuse to reopen the criminal investigation for 18 months from the summer of 2009 despite mounting evidence that the number of victims was much wider than officially admitted.

Leveson's long-awaited report is published on Thursday and will rule on the relationships between the press, politicians and police. While most media coverage preceding publication has focused on the reform of press regulation, the report is also one of the most significant inquiries into the conduct of the police in a generation.

The Leveson inquiry's warning letters, known as rule 13 letters, must be sent if the inquiry panel is considering making explicit or significant criticism of an individual or organisation, who then must be given an opportunity to respond. It is believed Leveson has not given notice that he intends to directly attack the integrity of any past or serving officer.

The phone-hacking scandal convulsed the Met, Britain's biggest police force, leading to accusations that Scotland Yard had failed to investigate the full extent of criminal practices at News International titles because it was too close or fearful of the media group controlled by Rupert Murdoch. Some went further and suggested the Met's allegedly botched inquiries were the result of impropriety.

When the Guardian ran the first of a series of articles saying that phone hacking at the News of the World (NoW) went beyond one rogue reporter, assistant commissioner John Yates took no more than eight hours in July 2009 to decide there was no need to reopen the criminal inquiry. He later said his decision, with hindsight, had been "pretty crap".

The refusal lasted until 2011, during which time police chiefs pressed the Guardian in private meetings that there was no basis to its allegations. The Met said new evidence handed over by News International, finally fulfilling the company's promise to co-operate with police, led to the new criminal investigation which, in turn, led to charges against Murdoch's journalists over hacking and illegal payments for information.

Andy Coulson, the former editor of the News of the World, Rebekah Brooks, the former editor of the Sun who resigned as News International chief executive, Clive Goodman, the former royal editor of the Sun, and Bettina Jordan-Barber, an official at the Ministry of Defence, will appear in court on Thursday on charges relating to Operation Elveden, the Met inquiry into alleged payments to police and public officials.

At the Leveson inquiry, Yates was questioned about champagne bought for him by the NoW and dinners at upmarket restaurants with newspaper executives and journalists. The fallout from phone hacking led to the resignation in July 2011 of the then commissioner Sir Paul Stephenson, followed the next day by Yates.

The demise of its top leadership followed more than a year of allegations, but was cemented when it was revealed that former NoW deputy editor Neil Wallis had been employed part-time by the force to work on strategic communications.

Among those whose roles have been questioned during the hearings are Andy Hayman, head of specialist operations at Scotland Yard at the time of the first hacking inquiry; and Dick Fedorcio, former Met head of communications. Fedorcio denied rigging a tendering process to ensure a £1,000-a-day contract went to Wallis.

The Met's position was set out by its counsel, Neil Garnham QC, in his closing statement. He said: "We frankly admit that there have been incidents which have led to a plain perception of cosiness between particular senior Metropolitan police service officers and particular journalists [and we] also acknowledge that the decisions in July 2009 and September 2010 not to reopen the phone-hacking investigation were taken too quickly and with a defensive and closed mindset."

The Met is keen to avoid any criticism from Leveson that its actions were corrupt or the result of inappropriate relationships with News International. Garnham said: "The evidence has demonstrated that the phone-hacking investigation was not at any stage limited because of pressure from or fear of the media, whether News International or the press more broadly."

rejutka
May 28, 2004

by zen death robot
Louis Walsh was on Ireland's flagship news programme this evening, talking about the settlement from The (Irish) Sun over the sexual assault allegations. It was loving hilarious; every single chance he got - aided and abetted by Bryan Dobson, the male anchor - he named The Irish Sun as a bunch of lying liars out to get him because The Irish Sun is staffed by lying liars who were out to get him by any means. Louis, however, fought these allegations by The Irish Sun because The Irish Sun is a bully and his name and business would be ruined by The Irish Sun otherwise.

Luckily and thankfully, he has been proven vindicated completely and The Irish Sun is totally untrustworthy and he does not know why anyone would have anything to do with The Irish Sun.

Also, The Irish Sun.

thehustler
Apr 17, 2004

I am very curious about this little crescendo
Political Scrapbook is worth a read today. Couple of things about the free speech network

http://politicalscrapbook.net/

Guto harri is a dick

Wiggly Wayne DDS
Sep 11, 2010



Anyone know what time the report will be published? Can't wait to sit down and read it.

Thanks to everyone who has helped out in this thread and all previous incarnations. Despite the cynicism of nothing happening we're at the stage of statutory legislation being put to paper to curb this behaviour. - at least if all goes to plan.

Special thanks to Brown Moses for keeping the thread alive and the regulars of the #leveson IRC channel during the streams. It's a shame not all leads were able to be worked with but considering the resources available it's remarkable the impact this thread has had.

Once again, thank you all for being a part of this.

cloudchamber
Aug 6, 2010

You know what the Ukraine is? It's a sitting duck. A road apple, Newman. The Ukraine is weak. It's feeble. I think it's time to put the hurt on the Ukraine

zylche posted:

Anyone know what time the report will be published? Can't wait to sit down and read it.



It's being released at 1.30.

Communist Bear
Oct 7, 2008

Looks like Nick Clegg and David Cameron can't agree (again). Breaking News says that Nick Clegg will make a separate statement in the commons.

This could be very interesting.

Chichevache
Feb 17, 2010

One of the funniest posters in GIP.

Just not intentionally.

PiCroft posted:

Hugh Grant Takes On The Tabloids is on Channel 4.

E: Holy loving balls I'd completely forgotten about that despicable turd McMullen and how he drove a vulnerable homeless girl to suicide. That poo poo stain should be in prison if there were any justice.

As one of the uninformed I would love a link to an article about that

PiCroft
Jun 11, 2010

I'm sorry, did I break all your shit? I didn't know it was yours

Chichevache posted:

As one of the uninformed I would love a link to an article about that

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lb9cnlbzhgk

About 00:46 is when McMullen starts speaking.

thehustler
Apr 17, 2004

I am very curious about this little crescendo
Last night's programme was good, what did everyone else think?

PiCroft
Jun 11, 2010

I'm sorry, did I break all your shit? I didn't know it was yours

It was great, I enjoyed watching the twitter feed. The bit with footage of Piers Morgan telling Charlotte Church how to hack phones was one of the best bits.

Also liked Free Speech Network not allowing the documentary camera into the meeting.

I actually kind of like the new trend of putting up a twitter hashtag so viewers can commentate live.

Hong XiuQuan
Feb 19, 2008

"Without justice for the Palestinians there will be no peace in the Middle East."
If you want to watch it and you're in the UK, then: http://www.channel4.com/programmes/hugh-grant-taking-on-the-tabloids/4od

BogDew
Jun 14, 2006

E:\FILES>quickfli clown.fli
The interview with the editor was a fun watch, especially when Grant whips out that ludicrous scare ad and points out how wobbly the headlines were. Hope there's a followup of sorts.

Loonytoad Quack
Aug 24, 2004

High on Shatner's Bassoon
Not long to go, anyone coming to #leveson on SynIRC? You can use Mibbit if you don't have an IRC client.

Pasco
Oct 2, 2010

Welp, Leveson has gone in hard on the press, it's all sounding grimly excellent so far.

EDIT: And the police and politicians appear to be getting off pretty lightly.

Plavski
Feb 1, 2006

I could be a revolutionary

Dan Sabbagh posted:

Lord Justice Leveson today recommended the introduction of the first press law in Britain since the seventeenth century – proposing that a statutory body such as Ofcom should take responsibility for monitoring an overhauled Press Complaints Commision.

The proposal – made despite the fierce opposition of Fleet Street to the introduction of statute – is designed to reassure the public that newspapers were subject to an effective and independent regulator to prevent a repetition of phone-hacking or other scandals.

Lord Justice Leveson, in the 56-page summary to his 2,000 page report, said that the purpose of legislation was “not to establish a body to regulate the press”. But he warned that if newspapers were not prepared to join a revamped PCC it would be necessary to force Ofcom to act as a “backstop regulator”.

He also said he “cannot recommend” the model of PCC reform draw up by Lords Black and Hunt, because it would be insufficiently independent of the press. The appointment of the chair of a revamped PCC would have to be done by a “fair and open process” with majority on the appointments commission that are “independent of the press”.

The proposed press law was one of a string of conclusions in a summary that contains withering criticism of standards in the industry – but the shorter document rarely singles out individual newspapers.

“There have been too many times when, chasing the story, parts of the press have acted as if its own code, which it wrote, simply did not exist. This has caused real hardship and, on occasion, wreaked havoc with the lives of innocent people whose rights and liberties have been disdained,” the judge wrote.

Leveson said that people like the McCanns and the parents of Milly Dowler had “devastating” experiences at the hands of the press, and that parts of the industry viewed celebrities as little more than “fair game”.

However, there was specific criticism levelled at the News of the World, and by implication, its owner Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation. Leveson said that “most responsible corporate entities would be appalled that employees were or could be involved in the commission of crime in order to further their business. Not so at the News of the World”.

In its summary there was little criticism of individual politicians or media owners. But the political handling of News Corp’s BskyB bid was signled out, and while there was no evidence that Jeremy Hunt, the then culture secretary, displayed “actual bias” – the exchanges between his former special advioser Adam Smith and James Murdoch’s special adviser, Fred Michel, did give rise to “a perception of bias”.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/nov/29/leveson-report-published-and-brooks-and-coulson-in-court-live-coverage

Plavski
Feb 1, 2006

I could be a revolutionary
Leveson is on live now: http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/nov/29/leveson-report-published-and-brooks-and-coulson-in-court-live-coverage

Munin
Nov 14, 2004


Well, so it seems that Leveson kept his criticism of politicians and associated hangers-on within bounds to keep the Tories on side. Hunt really should have been skewered, not to mention the entire Coulson debacle.

Wiggly Wayne DDS
Sep 11, 2010



The report is now available!
The Leveson Inquiry Website
The Report
Direct Link
Mirror
Executive Summary
Direct Link
Mirror

I'll throw up a mirror in a second since the site will probably fall over.
IRC to discuss is available through mibbit

Edit: Mirrored it on my server to be safe

Wiggly Wayne DDS fucked around with this message at 14:54 on Nov 29, 2012

The Supreme Court
Feb 25, 2010

Pirate World: Nearly done!
"The report speaks for itself. I will not be making any further comments. The ball is now back in the politician's court"

Sounds very much like he was deeply unimpressed when Cameron attempted to drag him in to the Hunt/ commons investigation issue, and wants to avoid being used in the political circus that's starting up.

When are Cameron and Clegg's statements?

mfcrocker
Jan 31, 2004



Hot Rope Guy

The Supreme Court posted:

When are Cameron and Clegg's statements?

3pm

Just Another Lurker
May 1, 2009

I really want to express my dislike of Lord Hunt of the PCC and hope he gets banished to the appropriate circle of hell.

Communist Bear
Oct 7, 2008

Well, this should be an amusing shitstorm. The question now is how Cameron and Clegg are going to respond.

I can already sense the press moving quickly into damage control mode. I wonder which paper will accuse Leveson of being a commie peado first.

Hallucinogenic Toreador
Nov 21, 2000

Whoooooahh I'd be
Nothin' without you
Baaaaaa-by
Is it fair to characterise Leveson's proposal as statutory regulation one step removed? It sounds like he's recommending a self regulatory body that is itself subject to statutory regulation.

Pozzo
Nov 4, 2009

What is like posting in a thread?
A Ballista, that's what!

Still can't help but think of this whole scandal as anything other than an elaborate extra series of the Thick of It, and the opening 10 minutes of this doco are just exemplifying this perfectly

Hong XiuQuan
Feb 19, 2008

"Without justice for the Palestinians there will be no peace in the Middle East."

Hallucinogenic Toreador posted:

Is it fair to characterise Leveson's proposal as statutory regulation one step removed? It sounds like he's recommending a self regulatory body that is itself subject to statutory regulation.

Any independent body with any kind of teeth would have to have statutory authority. It's a lot of hoohaa about press freedom without realising that in order to be able to achieve anything as a quasi-judicial body it would have to have powers granted by statute.

Hallucinogenic Toreador
Nov 21, 2000

Whoooooahh I'd be
Nothin' without you
Baaaaaa-by

Hong XiuQuan posted:

Any independent body with any kind of teeth would have to have statutory authority. It's a lot of hoohaa about press freedom without realising that in order to be able to achieve anything as a quasi-judicial body it would have to have powers granted by statute.

Oh, I'm certainly not against statutory authority for a regulator, it just seems like a bit of a fudge. Why make things more complicated just to pretend that there isn't statutory regulation?

Pasco
Oct 2, 2010

Hallucinogenic Toreador posted:

Is it fair to characterise Leveson's proposal as statutory regulation one step removed? It sounds like he's recommending a self regulatory body that is itself subject to statutory regulation.

No, If anything it is closer to the current model of self-regulation, but with less direct influence from the press themselves. This is combined with a threat that if they don't play ball (Like Richard Desmond pulling his papers out of the PCC) then there will be a 'backstop' of regulation through an independent body like OFCOM.

Total Meatlove
Jan 28, 2007

:japan:
Rangers died, shoujo Hitler cried ;_;

Pasco posted:

No, If anything it is closer to the current model of self-regulation, but with less direct influence from the press themselves. This is combined with a threat that if they don't play ball (Like Richard Desmond pulling his papers out of the PCC) then there will be a 'backstop' of regulation through an independent body like OFCOM.

Underwriting the Independent Regulator with OFCOM is a nice way of having the statutory intervention available, but the likes of the Mail and Star are still going to be crying over it as Stalinist because it fucks over their quite cosy routine of publishing absolute shite.

Any bets on how many pages it gets in tomorrows Mail? RIP FREE PRESS and 9 pages I reckon.

PiCroft
Jun 11, 2010

I'm sorry, did I break all your shit? I didn't know it was yours

I'm disappointed Hunt and Cameron basically got a free ride, but I imagine Leveson was wary of anything that might politicise the report. If Hunt and Cameron get off scot free (all but certain) I'll be angry but if it comes with the press having a significantly improved regulator I'll be mollified.

ufarn
May 30, 2009

PiCroft posted:

I'm disappointed Hunt and Cameron basically got a free ride, but I imagine Leveson was wary of anything that might politicise the report. If Hunt and Cameron get off scot free (all but certain) I'll be angry but if it comes with the press having a significantly improved regulator I'll be mollified.
Hunt was mentioned pretty explicitly in the speech, though, with regards to the Sky bid and Hunt's secret collaboration with them.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

EvilHawk
Sep 15, 2009

LIVARPOOL!

Klopp's 13pts clear thanks to video ref

Unsurprisingly, it seems like Cameron's deliberately ignoring/downplaying the statutory recommendations of Levenson, arguing that it would be like "crossing the Rubicon".

  • Locked thread