#1 By: Cory Doctorow, December 27th, 2013 11:00
#2 By: David Forbes, December 27th, 2013 12:05
Why is he wigged out about Snowden? Snowden revealed American govt secrets, not British govt secrets.
#3 By: Cacafuego, December 27th, 2013 12:09
I think he just means that the industry should come up with a solution on their own terms, before someone else comes up with it for them.
US and various other countries do this all the time as well - encouraging a given industry to self-regulate to solve a problem, with the threat that if they don't, the government will be forced to step in and the industry will probably get less favorable terms.
When we're talking about the press, of course, this conversation is horrifying. But I don't think the meaning of the word "voluntary" is being twisted quite the way you're implying here.
They're saying that the problem must be solved, but he's saying "either you solve it on your terms, or we'll solve it on ours."
#4 By: t3kna, December 27th, 2013 12:13
If Mr. Cameron agrees not to impose regulation, it means he's gotten the regulation he wanted without having to pay a political price for it. F that. Make him impose it; the press would end up in the same circumstance anyway, but at least it would be clear who's forcing the change.
#5 By: Fascinoma, December 27th, 2013 12:32
It's an ultimatum. It's certainly not voluntary- it's "you will do this, or we will do it for you, but I will get exactly what I want either way".
I want to know why these guys keep doing this. There gets to be a point where more power isn't doing anything for you, isn't there? The NSA sure isn't productive.
#6 By: Jason Lane, December 27th, 2013 13:09
This is more abut the phone hacking that the British gutter press were engaged in, Milly Dowler, etc...
Rather than NSA revelations.
Although it's easy to see how the good actions of the press are being used against them as well as their questionable tactics.
Lol the really funny thing is that they come down like a ton of bricks on the press for SPYING, yet when they do it, ahhhh, well you see different story, eh. Terrorists hmm.
Let's all blame this imbecile:
#7 By: Arthur Walker, December 27th, 2013 15:31
For a laugh, head to Wikipedia and read up on the Daniel Pearl Freedom of the Press Act. President Obama has a hard choice at this point. He can have the State Department ignore his own legislation as to not embarrass our ally when their annual report on Human Rights Practices comes out, or have an agency under his direct authority follow the law for once.
#8 By: Jason Lane, December 27th, 2013 16:08
Haha, This is the way it should be, here they want it to be like china
#9 By: Jardine, December 27th, 2013 17:35
David, you keep using the word "voluntary." I do not think it means what you think it means.
They're being voluntold.
#10 By: Peregrinus Phoenix, December 27th, 2013 17:45
All British govt secrets are American govt secrets. But not vice versa.
#11 By: Cory Doctorow, December 27th, 2013 19:05
The point is that any regulation that gives the government the power to shut down papers for dirty tricks in the Dowler story would also give them the power to shut down the Guardian for publishing the Snowden story.
#12 By: Jason Lane, December 27th, 2013 20:15
#13 By: Rindan, December 28th, 2013 14:45
This is about Snowden. They might cite the phone hacking as the reason, but it isn't like the government actually gives to shits about that. China defends the Great Fire Wall on the grounds that it stops pediphiles and other criminals, but that isn't the real reason. The real reason, just like Cameron trying to regulate the press, is about political control of the largest blow horn.
#14 By: Cory Doctorow, January 1st, 2014 11:00
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.