 |
| Guardian Edward Snowden scoop makes four splashes |
NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden in the Guardian: "I know the media likes to personalise political debates, and I know the government will demonise me."
Matthew Ingram on PaidContent: "The fact that both Greenwald and the Guardian are to some extent 'outsiders' may have helped them land what could be one of the biggest national-security stories since Watergate. And the stories — a series that Greenwald says has only just begun — will undoubtedly burnish the Guardian‘s reputation in the U.S., not to mention its web traffic."
Rod Logan in a letter to the Guardian: "It is good to know that our email letters to the Guardian that do not make it into your paper are at least being read by somebody, somewhere, sometime."
Roy Greenslade on his MediaGuardian blog: "The breaking of the Snowden revelations story must surely put The Guardian in line for a Pulitzer, making it the first British newspaper to win the award."
Ben Brogan in the Telegraph on Edward Snowden: "A close reading of his manifesto, with his talk of a “federation of secret law” ruling the world, CIA hit-squads, surveillance nets on the verge of activation and his right to act against a duly constituted, democratically elected government, suggests he has spent too much time watching Hollywood DVDs on his laptop and studying conspiracy theory forums on the web. Whether he is naive, deluded or malicious, he has generated a drama that is more about the fantastical steps he took to put himself beyond America’s grasp than the content of the classified information he released."
Boris Johnson in the Telegraph on the NSA allegations: "I think if I were Shami Chakrabarti, or my old chum David Davis, I might get thoroughly aerated at this point; and I have some sympathy with their general position. But then I am afraid I also have sympathy with our security services, and their very powerful need to use the internet to catch the bad guys – the terrorists, the jihadis, the child porn creeps. There is a trade-off between freedom and security, as Barack Obama rightly says; between the citizen’s right to total internet privacy, and the duty of the state to protect us all from harm."
The Sun apologises to Aliens: "IN an article on Saturday headlined ‘Flying saucers over British Scientology HQ’, we stated “two flat silver discs” were seen “above the Church of Scientology HQ”. Following a letter from lawyers for the Church, we apologise to any alien lifeforms for linking them to Scientologists."
Grey Cardigan on The Spin Alley: "I was quite interested in the Newspaper Society’s seven-point plan to save the regional publishing industry – and then I actually read it. Dropping opposition to mergers despite monopoly issues, curbing BBC competition, enforced use of local press advertising by government and public bodies, keeping statuary public notices in newspapers, shutting down council newspapers which compete with the local press, tighter copyright enforcement on the content of newspaper websites and maintaining zero-rating on newspaper cover prices. Is this really the best the NS can do? Seven points, every single one of them either defensive or protectionist (although I do agree with a couple of them). No leadership, no innovation, no brilliant ideas… Pathetic, just pathetic."
Peter Preston in the Observer: "The delay in agreeing some formula for press regulation is dangerous on both sides. The press – having written off the PCC as not tough enough – can't bodge along indefinitely with no successor in place. Something, in such a vacuum, is bound to go wrong. It always does. Witness the rather unexpected award of damages to a Tory deputy fundraising chairman complaining about a Sunday Times sting. If newspapers can't provide their own authority together, they may be left to swing separately. And think of what, post-2015, an incoming government with a clear mandate might do then."
Acting Times editor John Witherow ruling out an editorial merger with the Sunday Times [£]: “Fundamental changes are limited by the undertakings and in fact we see no great benefits at this stage from merging much of editorial, though we will keep this under review. It is important as much for commercial reasons as editorial that we keep the characters of the papers separate and this requires different staff in several areas.”
Peter Wright on the deal between Hacked Off and the political parties at the Culture, Media and Sport Committee, as reported by Press Gazette: "I think it has placed the Government in a position where they are trapped with a royal charter proposal and a set of recognition criteria that they know the industry are not going to sign up to. I can quite see that it may be difficult to get things moving again but at some point they do need to be got moving."
Guido Fawkes
The Media Blog
@TheMediaTweets on Twitter re-Murdoch divorce: "Hopefully everyone will respect Rupert Murdoch's right to privacy. Pretty sure he'd do the same."
Charles Moore in the Telegraph accusing the national press of being dominated by bad news compared to the local media: "Local papers and broadcasters are unashamedly on the side of the areas they serve. Of course they relish scandals, but they also delight in successes. At flower and dog shows, if local papers are to be believed, rain always 'fails to dampen the spirits'. National papers only really get interested when every exhibit is swept away in a tidal wave or, as happened recently at a dog show in Kent, people start punching one another."
Peter Hirsch posts on Charles Moore's article (above): "Thank you, Charles. Now perhaps you could just post the link to that dog show in Kent?"
[£] = paywall
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment