

UK phone hacking scandal - scapegraced
http://wikileaks.org/wiki/UK_phone_hacking_scandal:_The_News_of_the_World_didn%27t_go_far_enough

======
stilist
The problem I have with this response is that the News apparently targeted
anybody they thought would make a good story, not just people who were
probably doing things they shouldn't. If it were politicians and business
people, for serious research, okay—but the Guardian article I saw said a
number of celebrities were also spied on.

Journalism is not the same as tabloid "journalism".

------
dtf
So will WikiLeaks be hosting leaked celebrity sex videos now? Frankly, I've
always found their collection of politically themed documents a tad...
highbrow.

While I do fear privacy controls, there's quite a difference between public
interest and "shagging stories" (as an ex-NotW staffer referred to them when
interviewed on Newsnight).

------
theblackbox
"The right to freedom of speech is not short hand for the right to
pontificate. We defend speech freedoms for their connection to a deeper
underlying concept—the Right to Know. Without understanding the world around
us we can not function. Without an informed public, democracy has no meaning
and civilization is adrift. Through understanding the truth about ourselves
and the world around us, we are able to advance and survive. Ultimately our
understanding depends on discovering primary sources. Everything else is
speculation. "

I think this is a superbly well phrased summary of my own (and dare I say the
proverbial "hackers") beliefs.

