Hard News: Word of the Year 2014: #dirtypolitics
94 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 Newer→ Last
-
All things considered, at this juncture, when reviewing the entire mechanism, it’s not the police preventing Nicky from going about his business, it’s not the court system vacuuming up folks’ money. It is Rawshark’s unwillingness to face the music that is the burden on the taxpayer and most notably on Nicky Hager.
And with all due respect to Nicky who I understand is professionally obligated to protect his sources, and whom is obviously in the most difficult of ethical positions, the cards don’t seem to be stacked as favorably against him as they were against the MSM who were in contact with Rawshark up until the end, Nicky has traded court dates with Rawshark, which would be fine except for the burning question; all things considered, is protecting a criminal in the public interest?
I don't wish to offend or aggravate anyone with that, these are just questions left unanswered.
-
Kumara Republic, in reply to
all things considered, is protecting a criminal in the public interest?
One's criminal is another's cyber-vigilante. I'm of the view that when the law is an ass, sometimes it has to be bent for the public good.
-
For sure Deepred, which presumably sounds innocuous enough to someone who’s never had an account hacked, that’s the distinctly black and white interpretation of what I ambivalently feel to be murky shades of sickeningly uncomfortable gray. At its darkest troubling reaches this encompasses the hacking of the Slater’s computer, the IT circles for whom knowledge of this kind of occurrence would seem relatively routine, the exposed conspiratorial actions of Ministers and notable high-flyers, Ministerial obfuscation, invasive and heavy-handed police action. Through the gray-scale, we see journalists publishing the hacked data, the question of protecting criminals or protecting sources, all the way up to the light; well meaning nominations for New Zealander of the year, crowdfunded legal support, inquiries and sanctioning of culpable parties.
This is not a good vs evil screenplay: the potential outcomes of the litigation would seem to be either a finding that sanctions police conduct of this ilk or a precedent which empowers journalists to protect hacker sources. One might easily argue that the latter is nothing to concern myself with, my conversations are not of public interest. However thousands of New Zealanders communications do at some point or other – and sometimes quite routinely – touch on issues of public interest, were this Russell who’d been hacked our framing would naturally be considerably different, were it a council worker from Trentham perhaps not so much.
The fundamental issue for me is that hate him or hate him Cameron Slater is a private citizen, and private citizens should expect reasonable protection from cyber incursion of the nature carried out. If they engage in cyberbullying, intimidation, defamation, conspiracy to pervert the course of justice then the relevant laws must be strengthened and enforced.
Which is not to say I don’t understand the importance of this test case to the heady world of journalism but at what price? Is sacrificing the citizenry’s cyber security to the journalistic feeding ground a fair trade off? Do we want to encourage the publication of hacked info and by proximity hacking itself? Looking downstream neither outcome presents notable appeal.
I understand the importance of Hager’s insistence on protecting his source in this case, but again, this comes at what cost to other sources and stories contained in the confiscated hardware? If preserving one’s professional reputation and integrity comes at the expense of one’s professional career and livelihood then what is left? I have no doubt that those with the the most to gain from Nicky being waylaid by this intimidation are those who would be exposed in his future work. In a truly civil society the police would have first approached Nicky to initiate discussion about Rawshark, Rawshark who will be enjoying another Christmas unblemished by pending litigation, confiscation et al.
The law has always been a bit of an ass, but it’s our only ass. Robbing Peter to pay Paul will not suffice as a long-term answer to pressing issues, so I guess, at the end of the year, what I’m thinking is that if Nicky were to suddenly do a U-y and begin cooperating with police in their investigation, in these most novel of circumstances, then I wouldn’t think any less of him, there are sources and there are sources.
Anyway I best probably leave it there.
-
Sofie Bribiesca, in reply to
In a truly civil society the police would have first approached Nicky to initiate discussion about Rawshark, Rawshark who will be enjoying another Christmas unblemished by pending litigation, confiscation et al.
I think Nicky's professionalism on principle has led to him being the best person to handle the Police. I think Bradley Ambrose and the tea pot affair was a good example of what the Police will do once a complaint gets made by a well known person of interest. I think the Police pov was Hager and Ambrose was guilty and Slater and Key was innocent just because of the law. The murkiness reveals itself when the Police determine that the law is broken without doing their job of investigating the situation before they jump to the assumption of guilt. This may have been also why the Police wanted to be seen to have learnt from the teapot tapes with their lengthy search of Nicky's house and why Nicky's professionalism was needed then. Trouble is though that they still start with the same flawed concept of guilty until proven innocent (or essential for NZ democratic society) rather than innocent until proven guilty. Hence the clouds are grey and history proves that , yep, same shit ,different day.
-
Kumara Republic, in reply to
And I draw a clear distinction between what Rawshark did, and what the News of the World did. Rawshark is a lone operator who happens to scare the pants off certain establishment figures, because they're scared of their cover getting blown. Hackgate, on the other hand, had the neck-deep involvement of a media multi-national, the London Met, and senior Westminster insiders.
-
It gets worse. Bradbury notes this part of Hager's judicial challenge filing.
He further submitted that as some of the files seized included allegations of corruption within police, he was concerned that the data survived in its original condition.
Oh, and don't go near the comments unless you're swathed in tinfoil..
-
And #dirtypolitics has eaten itself, with Slater now delivering homilies about ethics.
Chris Hipkins is sitting on another ethics story where a senior National Party figure has been nailed for wife beating, and doing a whole lot of things that are not OK. Combine that with the Sabin story and it really looks like John Key doesn’t care about ethics.
Ethics in politics matter.
Often the left get ethics wrong when they claim National are unethical essentially crying wolf.
The public expect politics to be dirty, and accept that it is, but they don’t accept wife beating, sex offending, assaults or other major ethical lapses.
-
And #dirtypolitics has eaten itself, with Slater now delivering homilies about ethics.
Did that really need to be quoted and linked to here, Sacha? Cameron Slater’s m.o. of conviction by innuendo is hardly a mystery, but he’s got more than enough useful idiots spreading his shit without the help of anyone around here.
-
Sacha, in reply to
and linked to
you'll note I used http://donotlink.com for that.
-
Sacha, in reply to
conviction by innuendo
more about un-self-aware hypocrisy this time, surely?
-
giovanni tiso, in reply to
And #dirtypolitics has eaten itself, with Slater now delivering homilies about ethics.
What is "pink cocktail drinker" supposed to mean? Some sort of homophobic slur?
-
Sacha, in reply to
dunno. is there a drink called the 'pinko commie' or something?
-
Sacha, in reply to
ah, is that what upset Craig, perhaps? Fair enough. Will delete the line.
-
Craig Ranapia, in reply to
ah, is that what upset Craig, perhaps? Fair enough. Will delete the line.
Nah, the whole fucking thing upsets me basically, because this is just Slater doing what Slater does and he depends on other people to spread the muck. Same old same old, and honestly I don't think there's anything " un-self-aware" about it. Anyway, can I just have a hideous matching tie and hanky set for Christmas like a normal person? :)
-
Sacha, in reply to
socks
-
Craig Ranapia, in reply to
Nah... socks are easy. Tracking down a suitably fugly petroleum-based necktie-and-pocket square combo that will refuse to look appealing in tandem with anything a human being would willingly wear is a true test of resolve and dedication to the dark arts of Christmas shopping. I believe in you, Sacha! I know you can do it!
-
Sacha, in reply to
I am conscientiously avoiding anything resembling a mall
-
nzlemming, in reply to
I am conscientiously avoiding anything resembling a mall
We sourced most of the family presents from OpShops this year, like the Sallies and the Hospice shops. Reuse and give to charity at the same time.
-
mark taslov, in reply to
And I draw a clear distinction between what Rawshark did, and what the News of the World did. Rawshark is a lone operator who happens to scare the pants off certain establishment figures
I thought I’d let the hams settle before responding. I’d be wary of making that kind of comparison. Rawshark is certainly not media material by any stretch as indicated by the failure to reasonably redact personal info from the Herald dumps, but Rawshark is also not Karen Silkwood.
Nicky's admission implicates Rawshark as having hacked Slater for larks, and one could even conclude that to this day in all likelihood Rawshark would still just be hacker for shits and giggles if not for having been plucked from IT circle notoriety by Hager. Protecting your source is never going to be easy or make much sense when that whistle-blower is Little Toot. Beyond scared establishment figures, there are family members, none less than Slater’s own, who have no doubt expended time and dignity in pant recovery. Beatification remains off the cards this round.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.