|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24775846quote:Phone-hacking trial: Prince Harry message 'was hacked' Well, this just escalated.
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2013 16:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2024 21:03 |
|
|
Plavski posted:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24775846 We need them to have hacked Charles or William to get that all important Treason train running
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2013 16:10
|
|
|
Hacking Harry puts the Royal in Royal Charter.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2013 16:12
|
|
|
Ex-Sun editor Rebekah Brooks authorized £4K payment to source in UK military for Prince William photo, court hears - @BBCNews I knew this thread was going to get good again.. took a dozen months or so bad drat if its not worth it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2013 16:34
|
|
|
David Allen Green is reminding people that: 1) The defence will have had this evidence before the court has heard it this past few days and... 2) ...the defendants have still pleaded not guilty on those charges so it'll be interesting to hear the defence for what has come out over the past few days. Will it be on a technicality, maybe?
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2013 16:36
|
|
|
We thought we were hacking someone else also named Harry.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2013 16:50
|
|
|
ascii genitals posted:We thought we were hacking someone else also named Harry. It was some puerto rican guy sub-editor.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2013 17:08
|
|
|
I love how there are genuine revelations and hefty pieces of evidence coming out of this opening screed. I feared it might've been a case of: "hey, you're bad and we know it because someone told us once that you were bad and". I'm glad there's a real, dramatic case being made.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2013 17:11
|
|
|
Plavski posted:Hacking Harry puts the Royal in Royal Charter. Could you make it up? It turns out that you couldn't.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2013 17:16
|
|
|
Nice addendum to the topic there BM 
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2013 17:22
|
|
|
I bet Coulson and Brooks are glad that the various "Bring Bang Hanging!" campaigns didn't work out right now. Also, The Sun posted some story about benefit tourists last week that was proven not to be true. But don't worry! The Sun is a responsible news gathering outlet and gives corrections due prominence as per PCC code.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2013 17:49
|
|
|
Plavski posted:Nice addendum to the topic there BM Surely it should be Hero Harry. He's one of ARE BOYS after all
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2013 18:53
|
|
|
baka kaba posted:Surely it should be Hero Harry. He's one of ARE BOYS after all HRH Hero Harry
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2013 20:51
|
|
|
Heavy_D posted:HRH Hero Harry HRH Hero Harry hacked? Horrific!
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2013 20:53
|
|
|
Captain_Maclaine posted:HRH Hero Harry hacked? Horrific! Hallegedly.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2013 21:12
|
|
|
Total Meatlove posted:We need them to have hacked Charles or William to get that all important Treason train running Would the purchasing of the Buckingham Palace private phone directory help warm the boiler on that train?
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2013 22:41
|
|
|
Captain_Maclaine posted:HRH 'Halloween Hitler' Hero Harry hacked? Horrific! Even more.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2013 22:59
|
|
|
Just saw Brown Moses on TV! Looked like a total badass.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2013 15:50
|
|
|
Lord of the Llamas posted:Just saw Brown Moses on TV! Looked like a total badass. Was it the BBC thing on Iranians in Syria?
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2013 16:42
|
|
|
thehustler posted:David Allen Green is reminding people that: My guess is that the prosecution doesn't have absolute, smoking-gun proof that any executive at NI had specific knowledge of the details of the hacking and the defence will be leaning really heavily on the shadow of a doubt defence. It's a risky defence - particularly assuming the prosecution will be able to get clean-handed NI executives to testify that this sort of expense will have been very carefully vetted by Coulson, Brooks et. al. - but probably worth a punt.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2013 17:50
|
|
|
Brown Moses posted:Was it the BBC thing on Iranians in Syria? Yes. Who is that journalist? I've not heard of her before  For experienced fighters I'm surprised they got caught out so easily, from the moment they started driving up there I was thinking 'ambush' and then they just ended up skylined on a barren hillside.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2013 18:03
|
|
|
Banano posted:Yes. Who is that journalist? I've not heard of her before I missed it, and I was interviewed by a guy, so I don't know the reporter. I actually had a relative of the guy who filmed the footage contact me, asking if I had the original tapes. I've got a big piece about me coming in November's New Yorker, I'm hoping it'll result in me raising enough cash for the new website I have planned. After 2 years of blogging I might be on the verge of making some real money for once.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2013 18:18
|
|
|
Brown Moses posted:I missed it, and I was interviewed by a guy, so I don't know the reporter. I actually had a relative of the guy who filmed the footage contact me, asking if I had the original tapes. Have you thought of getting in on Omidyar's thing he's starting with Greenwald/Poitras/Scahill?
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2013 21:23
|
|
|
Well the website I have planned will basically bring together a lot of bloggers and other writers who I think have been producing high quality and detailed work using open source information (along with other information) on a variety of subjects into one place. That'll allow them to take advantage of my audience (which is made up of NGOs, activists, journalists, governments, etc) to get their work noticed, and also use my network of contacts. I sort of do that informally already, and everyone seems very keen to be part of the site. The stuff they write isn't stuff that magazines and websites would pay to publish, because it's too long and detailed, but it's the sort of work that gets them paid work. Another part of the site will be dedicated to exploring various investigative tools and techniques, and the use of open source information, and other subjects surrounding those areas. I hope that'll it'll teach and inspire more people to do what I've done, I guess you could call it citizen investigative journalism. Currently I've got some good contacts helping out with securing funding, and the New Yorker article will mention it a lot, so hopefully that'll help too.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2013 21:36
|
|
|
Brown Moses posted:Was it the BBC thing on Iranians in Syria? Yeah exactly that. Was a good excuse to tell my partner how "some guy from the internet" can make a real difference despite how lovely the world seems to be at the moment. I really hope you get your new site set up. I'm sure no one here needs explaining how important a good source of independent investigative journalism is.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2013 00:12
|
|
|
An example of the sort of thing I want to look at is the Investigate Dashboard, which I detailed in this post for Storyful http://blog.storyful.com/2013/10/25/brown-moses-on-connecting-conflict-zones/#.UnWHzPl7Its
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2013 00:17
|
|
|
Is the Iranians in Syria thing on iplayer, by any chance? e: found it here. stickyfngrdboy fucked around with this message at 01:13 on Nov 3, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2013 01:06
|
|
|
Brown Moses posted:Well the website I have planned will basically bring together a lot of bloggers and other writers who I think have been producing high quality and detailed work using open source information (along with other information) on a variety of subjects into one place. That'll allow them to take advantage of my audience (which is made up of NGOs, activists, journalists, governments, etc) to get their work noticed, and also use my network of contacts. I sort of do that informally already, and everyone seems very keen to be part of the site. The stuff they write isn't stuff that magazines and websites would pay to publish, because it's too long and detailed, but it's the sort of work that gets them paid work. Nicely done. It looked like "Citizen Journalism" was a dead scene while I was studying and it was gradually falling back to the establishment but Twitter and the speed info is getting around thanks to smartphones really seemed to re-invigorate it the last year or two and with the way your allies and yourself are utilizing the info, it's produces much better and more clear results than what "Citizen Journalism" was before. I really hope it takes off.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2013 01:38
|
|
|
Brown Moses posted:An example of the sort of thing I want to look at is the Investigate Dashboard, which I detailed in this post for Storyful Your presentation video is "unavailable". stickyfngrdboy posted:Is the Iranians in Syria thing on iplayer, by any chance? What a sad and tragic story. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2013 02:41
|
|
|
As happy as I am to see Brown Moses getting a project like this off the ground, I'm also sort of sad that modern professional journalism has decayed to the point where this is even necessary. It's like looking at disaster relief efforts.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2013 04:07
|
|
|
In it's way that BBC report is an example of the problem. They have a compelling and important story to tell (and they do a pretty good job of it), but they just can't resist the temptation to fill the programme with slick moody dramatised scenes of the reporters being important.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2013 09:58
|
|
|
I'm getting more and more invites to talk about what I do at universities and journalism summits. It seems so new to journalists they don't have a clue where to start or how to do it. I was speaking to one journalist for a well known news channel, and she said veteran journalists like her don't have a clue about any of this stuff. That's one of the reasons I want to write about it on the new site. I'm also hoping to get involved with a organisation that's going to be running 3 day training courses on this sort of thing for journalists, NGOs, activists, etc.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2013 10:09
|
|
|
Rapey Joe Stalin posted:In it's way that BBC report is an example of the problem. They have a compelling and important story to tell (and they do a pretty good job of it), but they just can't resist the temptation to fill the programme with slick moody dramatised scenes of the reporters being important. That's always been how TV works. See also reporters standing outside Westminster on a Sunday when no MP is likely to be there.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2013 10:35
|
|
|
Iohannes posted:That's always been how TV works. See also reporters standing outside Westminster on a Sunday when no MP is likely to be there. Have you ever seen the news from the days before outside broadcast? Pretty tedious watch a guy tell you the news from behind a desk. Even the Falklands War was reported by audio only as the film took three weeks to get back to London. You were lucky if the had an actual photo from the scene, as opposed to some stock shot. Instantaneous transmission from remote location is actually quite nice, if you remember the old days. It doesn't add anything other than a less boring visual, but if the Beeb didn't do it they'd get complaints that their news was boring.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2013 11:57
|
|
|
Reporters didn't become 'personalities' until the first Gulf War. Sure, you had star reporters, but it was usually some guy with microphone giving some dry description of the what went down. For the past 20+ years, the news has gradually inserted that 'drama' like Stalin was talking about. I recently watched some old news clips from the 60's and even though it was pretty dry like HortonNash said, I felt like I learned something instead of being told something.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2013 12:18
|
|
|
HortonNash posted:Have you ever seen the news from the days before outside broadcast? Pretty tedious watch a guy tell you the news from behind a desk. Even the Falklands War was reported by audio only as the film took three weeks to get back to London. You were lucky if the had an actual photo from the scene, as opposed to some stock shot. I know. I wasn't criticising the BBC (at least not for that), just pointing out it's an old TV trick to make reporters seem party to the action. Foreign affairs is a bit different because sometimes they are under fire, doesn't stop some of them standing around in flak jackets hundreds of mile from combat though (this tends to be more common among US reporters) Political reporters are the worst, however. It's all about access and so proximity to buildings where stuff happens makes it look to the audience like they access. So you see them standing outside Number 10 while the PM is on a foreign trip or something. Number 10 being visual shorthand for the PM. Charlie Brooker did some stuff on this in Newswipe Iohannes fucked around with this message at 12:53 on Nov 3, 2013 |
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2013 12:49
|
|
|
Automatic Slim posted:Reporters didn't become 'personalities' until the first Gulf War. Sure, you had star reporters, but it was usually some guy with microphone giving some dry description of the what went down. The biggest example I always see people use, including lecturers, is this old report by Walter Cronkite on the death of John F. Kennedy https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2K8Q3cqGs7I It's very direct, calm and to the point. Also quite strange to look at without the fancy bumpers and graphics whizzing around. There's also an interesting video showing the death of Princess Diana and how the news handled it then as well https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-KoZ7BxrdI
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2013 14:42
|
|
|
The strange thing to me is what Brown Moses (and others, of course) is up to is how journalism used to be done, only cheaper. It used to be that journalists were entirely reliant on local people who may or may not have been journalists ("stringers") who would post/telegram them reports of what was happening in, say, Calcutta, and the journalist would then try and piece together a coherent story from that without ever leaving Fleet Street. It was the advent of portable cameras and easy photographic printing in newspapers around WWI that started the whole "Journalists have to be on the scene" idea which led to the current ridiculous situation where the BBC will send out a dozen reporters to stand outside a hospital where a Royal was giving birth, reading statements that had been emailled to the newsroom telling them nothing was happening and asking each other What It All Means. Despite more and more money being thrown at what is laughingly called "newsgathering", the combination of "We go live now to..." and the need to fill more and more airtime means journalists now have neither the time or the ability to actually find out what's happening in any meaningful way. I'm deeply suspicious of the "citizen journalism" movement though, if only because on multiple occasions I've had people standing next to me in a situation telling me the exact opposite of what we could both see was actually happening, because they'd read something on Twitter. At it's best it can be very, very good but if not carefully filtered it's basically "And now we go live to Some Bloke Down The Pub Whose Brother's Girlfriend's Mum Heard Something".
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2013 14:56
|
|
|
There's also the problem of bias, concious or not. How many citizen journalists are going to be aware of the need for, let alone be scrupulous in the application of, impartiality?
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2013 15:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2024 21:03 |
|
|
Given what's happening here though, can we really say professional journalists are? Obviously a professional impartial journalist is going to be much better, but if we have to have bias in our reporting surely it's at least better to have a wider variety of biases?
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2013 15:07
|
|
