David Cameron Working To Stop UK Press From Publishing Anything More From Snowden Leaks
from the no-free-press dept
It looks like Glenn Greenwald picked the right time to leave the UK's The Guardian newspaper. Last week, we noted that David Cameron was pushing for an investigation into the paper for publishing stories based on Ed Snowden's leaks, and now Cameron is going even further in his attempt to stomp out any sense of a free press in the UK, threatening to make moves to block UK publications from writing anything else new about as-yet-unreleased Snowden documents. Because that'll stop the outrage.David Cameron threatened on Monday to act to stop newspapers publishing what he called damaging leaks from former U.S. intelligence operative Edward Snowden.I love that phrase "social responsibility." Because an awful lot of people would argue that the Guardian has demonstrated a hell of a lot more "social responsibility" in publishing the stories they have, revealing the massive overreach of the NSA, GCHQ and others in violating the civil liberties of people around the globe.
"If they don't demonstrate some social responsibility it will be very difficult for government to stand back and not to act," Cameron told parliament.
Later in his talk, Cameron suggests that he doesn't want to have to take direct action -- which is an implication that he might do exactly that:
"I don't want to have to use injunctions or D-notices (publication bans) or the other tougher measures. I think it's much better to appeal to newspapers' sense of social responsibility," he said.There's that "social responsibility" phrase again. I don't think it means quite what Cameron seems to think it means. Social responsibility is not being stenographers for the government's point of view. Quite the opposite. You'd think that someone in Cameron's position would understand that.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: david cameron, gchq, nsa, press freedom, social responsibility, super injunctions, surveillance, uk
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
"If they don't demonstrate some social responsibility it will be very difficult for people to stand back and not to act."
We won't miss you when your gone.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And as far as I understand it unless he actually declares a State of War there IS NOTHING the UK government can legally or otherwise do that would stop the UK media from reporting on it.
It takes a brave idiot (Cameron) to even contemplate what even Ms Thatcher would never of even in her wildest dreams imagined the merest thought of doing..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This public response will be used to bring about a fundamental structural change in the way people are governed. This change will appear to increase freedom of the individual but will in fact be used to create greater control over the individual.
As was noted many years ago, all such activities require an increase in the legislative burden to control the problems. This legislative burden is then used to create even more legislation, which ends up reducing your freedom of action by reducing your requirement as an individual to act responsibly by your choice. The end result is that there are more rights and less responsibilities. This ultimately is detrimental for the individual.
My own children have been taught that you have only one right and that is to choose your path in path. This means that you are fully responsible for the choices you make and the actions you do as a result of these choices. You cannot blame anyone else for the results that occur from your choices, decisions and actions.
Unfortunately, our politicians and other leaders like to lay the blame for the results of their choices, decisions and actions at the feet of anyone else but themselves.
As individuals, each of us needs to accept that when we make choices and decisions that we are accountable for them and accept that if it goes against the choices made by others that there will be consequences. This includes accepting that when we make public statements, either known or anonymously, that others will not necessarily agree and may even go gunning for us.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Actually a supranational system can be positive if it has a focus on removing barriers from the national laws instead of just streamlining them. Unfortunately politicians and officials seems to be unable to achieve that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"WTF, why is a film director doing shit like this!"
Couple seconds later after googling David Cameron
"Ahhh, that makes more sense"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I want to see parliament on that day.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Better Title:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I'll say this: he can take his "social responsibility" whatever the twisted definition he gave it and shove up his ass. For all we care it would be of great "social responsibility" if people personally threw him out with some old fashioned whipping for trampling with freedom of speech and freedom of press. It's clear he considers the Government to be above all regardless of crimes and harmful things it commits against its people.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Of course, the problem with the British system is that there are two main Political parties, neither of which show merit, compassion or understanding for the electorate that elected them into power. And with the current debacle of Government, it seems the traditional third option, Liberal Democrats, will never be trusted again.
On the plus-side, this gives us the chance to vote for an independent, or otherwise non-traditional, party (Pirate Party, hopefully...); but I suspect there are enough people still holding on to the traditional ideals of Conservative and Labour, despite the growing confluence of both those systems of belief.
Ah, well: perhaps revolution will come, in time.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Response to: Ninja on Oct 29th, 2013 @ 2:14am
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Won't stop the news, will stop the debate.
By forcing our newspapers to stop reporting on the leaks it does not stop the leaks from being reported on. Given that as yet he has not implemented a national internet filter, that reporting will be easily available to pretty much every one. In short every one will know what has been leaked regardless.
So the question becomes why would he stamp on the neck of the UK's press at a point when it will not actually stop the leaks? Well that's simple really... the one and only thing that will change is our ability to have an open and honest national debate about what the meaning of what is being reported. It shuts down a persons ability to publicly question the governments actions.
At this points it's worth remembering these leaks are the government's own damn fault and that the damage has already been done at the point they failed to protect their information. Shutting down our press will do nothing to change that. What's happening here is simply a re-framing of that to making any damage the presses responsibility so it can publicly stifle debate about programs it's worried are illegal.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
i wonder what he is really up to? he is doing whatever it takes to please the US entertainment industries. he is doing whatever it takes to ensure the whole UK system collapses! he is doing whatever it takes to see more and more people in poverty!
perhaps he just wants to give the UK over to Islam or something. he definitely isn't interested in keeping the UK as the UK, a center that has been admired by all for decades
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
He knows.
He understands it, but that is off message.
I'm sure, like many bullshitters, he is secretly pleased when the truth conveniently aligns with the agenda he must present.
But this is one of those other times and his smile won't have been any less convincing as he made the statement.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Stop The Presses
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Stop The Presses
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
own shit, their real problem is that they have been caught, and the more that comes out, and it all will. The worse it will get for them. The shoe that has not droped yet and the real pisser in all of this is the economic spying that has been going on in this spying, you can not collect the amount of data those bastards were stealing and not be tempted to use the data for personal or group profit, the smell of corruption is all over this, and it will get stronger by the day.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Freedom is where the government fears the people
Freedom is where the government fears the people.
I guess we're on the right track.
Thank you mr Snowden.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
He doesn't have the support in Parliament
They were told Snoopers Charter was needed by the spooks and are angry that nobody mentioned the spooks were already doing far more than would be legal, even under Snoopers Charter.
So the benefits of a free press are crystal clear to them.
General Alexander did a weird video trying to defend the program and calling for curbs on press freedom too. If he does that on youtube and not in Congress then it's very telling.
Hope he didn't spend tax money on that production.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Brilliant !
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
In this uber-connected world we'd just read the story on foreign news websites or social media while simultaneously making the governments censorship attempts look more and more stupid and further undermining their authority.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It will be quite interesting to see the results when Cameron tries getting court orders. Once a British judge has arrived at the state "not amused", you better not get in his way. And bootlickers are harder to find in that profession in the UK than in the US.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Translation
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
David Cameron said it, so it is true and we must bend to his will.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]