Olympics Committee Forces Oregon Restaurant To Change Its Name

from the the-trigger-happy-thug-with-the-IP-boomstick dept

The next Olympic games may be more than a year away but that's not stopping the International Olympic Committee from forcing a business -- located nowhere near any upcoming Olympic site and with more than a half-decade of uncontested use -- to change its name. [h/t to Techdirt reader The Baker]

In just six years, Portland, Oregon's Olympic Provisions has gone from a small restaurant with an attached charcuterie facility to a major brand complete with Portlandia immortality and an upcoming cookbook. And now it has to change its name, thanks to a cease-and-desist notice from the International Olympic Committee, the organization that coordinates the Olympic Games. OP co-founder/meat-maker Elias Cairo says OP's two restaurants (one of which has been a longtime member of the Eater Portland 38) and meat department will soon re-brand into Olympia Provisions, bypassing the trademark dispute by altering one letter.

The former Olympic Provisions says it was caught up in the IOC's periodic "random sweeps" -- which sounds an awful lot like the sort of behavior one district court memorably called out when dealing with a trademark bully.

The owner of a mark is not required to constantly monitor every nook and cranny of the entire nation and to fire both barrels of his shotgun instantly upon spotting a possible infringer.

But that is very much the way of the IOC, and it monitors every nook and cranny of the entire world with its fingers on the trigger. The cease-and-desist it sent to the former Olympic Provisions was so overwrought that the owners first thought it was a joke. But a discussion with its lawyers made it clear it wasn't. The IOC's tactics would be laughable if only they weren't so often successful and damaging to the businesses on the receiving end.

"We start looking around at everything we've branded, from packaging to restaurants to delivery trucks," Cairo says of the costs to change OP's name. "To put a dollar figure on it would be impossible."

The IOC doesn't care about the source of the business names it finds infringing. It will make exceptions for businesses located around geographic features that already carry the name "Olympic," pretty much limiting US use of the term to the Washington area. And the local arm of the IOC -- the United States Olympic Committee -- will step in if the marketed goods bearing an Olympic brand are sold outside of that region.

Olympic Provisions, however, is named for a historic building -- something the IOC won't permit, although it has "graciously" allowed the business a little time to make the change.

For Olympic Provisions — which was named after the building that houses its first restaurant, Portland's historic Olympic Mills building — they've reached a deal with the IOC that will allow them to slowly phase out the old OP labels and branding. (The short-term solution involves simply stamping a letter "A" on top of the existing labels; the OP team expects to be completely rebranded by this summer.)

The IOC claims it fears trademark dilution when defending its aggressive domination of the word "Olympic," but only comes off as unhinged and paranoid. But most entities don't have the funds to engage in legal warfare with this brand giant, so it often needs nothing more than a threatening letter to assure compliance.

Filed Under: intellectual property, olympic provisions, olympics
Companies: international olympic committee, olympic provisions, us olympic committee

Boston City Employees Barred From Hating On Olympics; Mayor Says Free Speech Still Intact

from the bwah? dept

The Olympics: an every other year experiment in curtailing the rights of its hosts while draining those hosts of as much money as possible. It's apparently gotten so bad that essentially nobody actually wants to host the olympic games. Those still relentlessly putting in bids to bring on this multi-nation quagmire of garbage probably don't care all that much that the IOC and its smaller sub-parts are money-grubbing, number-trademarking, viewer-hating megalomaniacs that quite possibly lack what we refer to as souls and may or may not be fully-manufactured Hitler-clones. But if they do care about those things, they better not say so, according to what is apparently boiler-plate legal language in Boston's agreement with the USOC.

Nobody who lives in Boston actually wants the city to win its bid for the 2024 Olympic games. And yet, in a joinder agreement between the city and the United States Olympic Committee, mayor Marty Walsh has signed a contract that forbids city employees from speaking negatively about the bid, the IOC, or the Olympic games. It's a great day for free speech in the cradle of liberty.

Boston, home of the Boston Massacre and the tea party revolt, the city from whence the USS Constitution launched, the home of both President John Adams', has decided to suspend their employees' free speech rights in favor of hosting a corporate sporting event packed with more authoritarian bullshit than your average Middle East dictatorship. Let that sink in for a moment.

Or, if you're like Boston's Mayor, Marty Walsh, just dust that crap off your shoulder cuz it's no big deal, yo.

"Mayor Walsh is not looking to limit the free speech of his employees and, as residents of Boston, he fully supports them participating in the community process. This was standard boilerplate language for the Joinder Agreement with the USOC that all applicant cities have historically signed. The Mayor looks forward to the first citywide community meeting that will be held next week."

The Mayor has also claimed that there would absolutely be no punishment for city workers who decided to express their feelings about the Olympics being a big bucket of money-sucking dogshit, but contracts are contracts, so they may not be inclined to test Walsh's honesty on that point. So I'll do it for them. The Olympics sucks. Just read it in a Boston accent.

Filed Under: boston, free speech, gag order, marty walsh, olympics
Companies: ioc

Almost No One Wants To Host The Olympics, Because It's A Costly, Corrupt Mess

from the protect-that-brand dept

For many years, we've written about questionable activities by the Olympics, usually focusing on the organization's insanely aggressive approach to intellectual property, which could be summed up as "we own and control everything." Yes, the Olympics requires countries to pass special laws that protect its trademarks and copyrights beyond what standard laws allow. Of course, this is really much more about control and money. It's simply shining a light on just how corrupt the whole Olympic setup is. For decades, the Olympics has tried to hide this basic truth, and it has always been able to get various cities and countries to actively compete to suffer through the Olympics requirements, often with promises of big money in tourism and local business as a result. But it looks like jig may be up.

As Dan Wetzel notes, it appears that almost no one has any interest in hosting the 2022 Olympics. The only active attempts are Beijing (which is 120 miles from a mountain suitable for skiing) and Almaty Kazakhstan. All the other credible players have bailed out:

Certainly not Oslo, Norway, not even at the bargain rate of an estimated $5.4 billion in a nation of just five million people. It once wanted desperately to host the 2022 Winter Olympics and its bid was so perfect that it was considered the favorite to win. Then the country held a vote earlier this year and 55.9 percent of Norwegians opposed.

Wednesday the Norwegian government effectively pulled the bid. Norwegians are known for the ability to cross country ski really fast and being so friendly they beg visitors to come experience their picturesque nation. Since this involved the IOC however, they decided against having visitors come experience their picturesque nation to watch them cross country ski really fast.

They aren't alone. Previous finalist Krakow, Poland, saw 70 percent voter opposition and pulled its application. A majority felt the same way in Germany and Switzerland, killing bids in Munich and St. Moritz respectively. In Sweden the majority party rejected funding the proposed games in Stockholm.

Plenty of other countries didn't even bother thinking about it. As Wetzel points out, basically the only two countries interested are authoritarian regimes:

Essentially the only places interested in hosting the 2022 games are countries where actual citizens aren't allowed a real say in things – communist China and Kazakhstan, a presidential republic that coincidentally has only had one president since it split from the old USSR in 1989.

To sum it up:

Essentially the entire world has told the IOC it's a corrupt joke.

Don't hold back:

The IOC has billions of dollars laying around and billions more coming because to most people the Olympics is just a television show and the ratings are so high that the broadcast rights will never go down. The IOC doesn't pay the athletes. It doesn't share revenue with host countries. It doesn't pay for countries to send their athletes. It doesn't lay out any construction or capital costs. It doesn't pay taxes.

It basically holds caviar rich meetings in five star hotels in the Alps before calling it a day. That and conduct weak investigations into corruption charges of the bidding process, of course. "No evidence uncovered" is on a win streak.

It's a heck of a racket.

Except now the racket may be ending. Except for China and Kazakhstan. Wetzel's conclusion is spot on:

So China or Kazakhstan it is, the last two suckers on earth willing to step up to this carnival barker.

One lucky nation will win. The other will host the 2022 Winter Olympics.

The Olympics are from another era -- one of top down, "we control and own everything while paying none" variety. We've seen those types of businesses failing in lots of other arenas -- and now it may be happening to the Olympics as well.

Filed Under: china, control, corruption, kazakhstan, olympics, sports, top down

GCHQ Neglected To Tell Its Overseers That The NSA Granted Widespread Access To PRISM Databases

from the oversight! dept

Ryan Gallagher, over at The Intercept, has a report on some previously unreleased Snowden documents, detailing how GCHQ was given a taste of widespread access to the NSA PRISM database as well as its bulk metadata collections during the London Olympics in 2012, and that they were basically begging for continuous unrestricted access to those databases. At the time of the documents, the NSA had not yet given GCHQ such access (beyond that one shot during the Olympics) but apparently seemed receptive to the idea. That wasn't the most interesting part of the article, however. After all, what kind of spies would they be if they weren't constantly seeking more access to the troves of info that the NSA had been collecting as well. The part that struck me as just as noteworthy is that it appears that GCHQ hid its level of access to the NSA databases from its overseers in Parliament:

[Julian] Huppert, the member of Parliament, served on a committee that reviewed – and recommended against – a push from the British government for more powers to access private data before the Snowden materials became public last year.

At no point during that process, Huppert says, did GCHQ disclose the extent of its access to PRISM and other then-secret NSA programs. Nor did it indicate that it was seeking wider access to NSA data – even during closed sessions held to allow security officials to discuss sensitive information. Huppert says these facts were relevant to the review and could have had a bearing on its outcome.

“It is now obvious that they were trying to deliberately mislead the committee,” Huppert told The Intercept. “They very clearly did not give us all the information that we needed.”

One of the common themes that these revelations keep re-emphasizing is that the intelligence community keeps insisting that they won't abuse their powers because of their strong "oversight." And yet, every time we get a chance to look more closely at the actual oversight, we find that the oversight is almost non-existent. The intelligence community is as cagey and misleading in private classified sessions as they are in public.

Filed Under: gchq, nsa, olympics, oversight, prism, surveillance

NBC Insists Twitter Is Useless Because Not Enough People Tweeted During The Olympics... Which NBC Made Difficult To Watch Online

from the maybe-rethink-your-position dept

People are jumping on a story in the Financial Times, in which NBC Universal's research chief, Alan Wurtzel totally trashes Twitter for not being particularly important to television viewing. The basic claim about the relationship between Twitter and television may, in fact, be true, but the reasoning that Wurtzel presents for his conclusions makes no sense at all. In fact, it raises questions about what kind of "research" NBC Universal actually does.

NBCU had expected social media to have a dominating effect on viewership for the Games. However, during the 18-day period of coverage, just 19 per cent of Olympic viewers posted about the games on social media, the broadcaster found.

Frankly, that seems somewhat high to me. Part of the issue is that Wurtzel seems to think that everyone watching the Olympics and using social media would or should then express that fact to the public. That's bizarre. Plenty of people use social media not to speak out directly, but to pay attention to what their friends and family are doing. This is the same sort of debate that internet-native folks have had for years about participants in online communities vs "lurkers." But lurkers have tremendous value as well, even if they don't participate. Frankly, a 19% participation rate in an online community is massive. It's amazing that NBC Universal seems to think this is a bad thing.

“I am saying the emperor wears no clothes. It is what it is. These are the numbers.”

There are three totally empty statements there, none of which have anything to say.

But, you know, something else that might have had a big impact on this? The fact that NBC Universal has a very long history of making it extraordinarily difficult to actually watch the Olympics that people want to see online (you know, at the time when they're most likely to be connected to social media). Combined with its continued demented decision to make it nearly impossible to watch any of the hot events live and you've basically wiped out many of the big reasons why people might be on social media talking about things. The whole thing was constructed around a typical TV "broadcast" mentality. Is it any wonder that it didn't really resonate with people on social media?

Filed Under: alan wurtzel, lurkers, olympics, social media, tweets
Companies: comcast, nbc universal, twitter

NBC Crows About Thwarting 45,000 'Illegal' Olympic Videos, Ignores The Fact That It Drove Users To Them

from the gold-medal-inconsistency dept

Aside from a now-traditional lack of enough live coverage, pretty awful commentary, a ridiculous over-abundance of a strangely limited rotation of ads, making Bode Miller cry and Bob Costas' double eye infection, NBC did a pretty good job covering the Winter Olympics, right? NBC certainly believes so, even though it seems that many Americans found NBC coverage so immensely annoying, they went to great lengths to install VPNs so they could watch Canada's version of the games instead.

What has NBC achingly proud, however, is the fact that the company cleverly worked with Olympics officials to prevent viewers from trying to access the games via non-sanctioned NBC streams and online outlets. According to NBC, the company worked to kill off some 45,000 videos of Olympics competition, and an estimated 5,000 live streams (they avoid showing their math or any historical context for those numbers):

"Officials estimate that 20,000 videos of Olympic competition were kept off YouTube, either through filtering technology that prevents them from being posted in the first place or locates and takes them down shortly after they are added. Another 20,000 were stopped from distribution on similar video-sharing sites popular elsewhere in the world, like Dailymotion in Europe or VK.com in Russia, NBC said."

Right, well, good job I guess. The problem is that while NBC was busy waging their proud war on Olympic videos, they were simultaneously engaged in practices that were driving users to those same viewing options. While NBC did offer some live streams on their website, they were largely restricted to customers that only pay for cable, as part of the industry's lame "TV Everywhere" mindset (a mindset that increasingly doesn't seem to be doing much of anything for anybody, including cable). Worse, even some paying TV customers, like those paying for Comcast's new HBO, basic cable and broadband bundle, weren't allowed to watch the streams because they weren't buying expensive enough TV packages.

To hear NBC tell it, this kind of absurd inconsistency in policy is all a perfect example of how when NBC and sanctioned friends work together to be inconsistent, it results in online perfection:

"When all the players in the digital ecosystem cooperate and work together, it is possible to create an online environment in which legitimate commerce thrives, jobs are created and consumers receive content how, when and where they want it," said John McKay, NBC spokesman."

A real gold medal performance all around, NBC. You really stuck the landing.

Filed Under: olympics, piracy, streaming, vpn
Companies: nbc

How Snowboarders Are Waving Company Logos In The IOC's Face... And There's Nothing It Can Do About It

from the the-corporate-promotion-that-got-away dept

The International Olympics Committee has this "branding" thing down cold. (No pun intended. The IOC is just as obnoxious during the Summer Olympics.) Everything that doesn't belong to an Official Sponsor has its logo covered (including bathroom fixtures!) until the multi-ring circus of sports (and quasi-sports) folds up the last multimillion dollar tent and blows town.

The IOC is the ultimate control freak. This maniacal desire to cleanse the Games of anything not directly related to its corporate sponsors often results in the sort of behavior you'd normally associate with severe misanthropy. Hobbyist knitters get slapped with C&Ds. A 30-year-old restaurant is forced to change its name. A prominent news outlet has to build its own internal Starbucks in order to escape drinking nothing but the Official Coffee of the Olympics, which is crafted each day to the searing hot specifications of hallowed coffee mecca… McDonalds.

Each and every form of IP protection has been abused by the IOC. Bogus takedown notices/C&Ds are as much a part of the Olympic heritage as lighting the torch or channel-surfing during the figure skating events. The IOC's rules even provide strict regulations for wearing the logos of the official sponsors, not to mention the sponsors who actually footed the bill so these athletes could take part in the Games.

But, as the New York Times points out, even a finely-tuned branding machine like the IOC can be defeated with a little creativity.

The International Olympic Committee, leery of spoiling the canvas, has a 33-page book filled with detailed restrictions on logos. It dictates the size and placement of them on everything from team uniforms at the opening ceremony to the emblems on a skier's gloves and the stickers on a bobsledder's helmet. Observers might go the entire Olympics and not notice them.

At least until the snowboarders and skiers go airborne.

The bottom of them may be the most prominent billboards at the Winter Games, a bit of a twist of guerrilla marketing. When someone such as the snowboarder Shaun White flies through the air, cameras often catch the underside of his board, on which Burton, the name of its manufacturer, is spread in large, bold letters. Those images flash across television screens and are published around the world.

Eight of the 12 finalists in the men's halfpipe competition rode Burton boards. All of them went upside down.

The board makers claim this isn't intentional and, indeed, it probably isn't. But what a fortuitous coincidence. Snowboards have normally featured artwork and company logos on the bottom of the board and with riders more technically adept than ever, the chances of a company's airborne logo being splashed across the screen continue to increase.

What can the IOC do about this? Nothing really, unless it wants to rewrite the rulebook. As the New York Times points out, competition snowboards are roughly identical to the ones sold to the public. This makes the company-centric artwork part of the equipment itself, rather than something added especially for Olympic competitors, which would run afoul of the guidelines.

"The identification of the manufacturer may be carried as generally used on products sold through the retail trade during the period of 12 months prior to the Games," the rules read.

So, if Burton makes a board with Burton written across the bottom of it during the preceding year, and a competitor splashes Burton all over during his or her run, there's not much the IOC can do, other than perhaps stare sadly at all of the toilets with covered-up logos and compose takedown letters for crocheting enthusiasts halfway around the world.

Filed Under: branding, cease and decist, olympics, sponsorship
Companies: ioc

Security Researcher Punches Holes In NBC's 'Everyone Going To Sochi Will Be Hacked" Story; NBC Doubles Down In Response

from the because-'being-careless-will-get-you-hacked'-isn't-headline-material dept

Earlier this week, NBC "reported" that journalists and visitors to Sochi are being immediately hacked virtually as soon as they acquire a connection. [AUTOPLAY WARNING.] NBC presented this as something completely inescapable in its report, which purportedly showed NBC journalist Richard Engel's cellphone and laptop being compromised "before he even finished his coffee."

All very scary but all completely false.

Errata Security points out that the entire situation was fabricated.

The story shows Richard Engel "getting hacked" while in a cafe in Russia. It is wrong in every salient detail.

They aren't in Sochi, but in Moscow, 1007 miles away.

The "hack" happens because of the websites they visit (Olympic themed websites), not their physical location. The results would've been the same in America.

The phone didn't "get" hacked; Richard Engel initiated the download of a hostile Android app onto his phone.

...and in order to download the Android app, Engel had to disable a lock that prevents such downloads -- something few users do [update].

While your average person might be lured to sketchy sites supposedly related to the Olympics, most of these people wouldn't have disabled the default locks on their phone, as Robert Graham at Errata Security points out.

The truth makes for a much less interesting story, however, and as Graham points out, Engel's use of the passive voice ("the phone was hacked" rather than "I downloaded a virus") deliberately obscures what's actually happening on the video. It's not Sochi's wireless connections that are "infected," it's the sites themselves. No one's getting hacked instantly unless they're going out of their way to act carelessly in a potentially hostile environment. Following normal internet safety procedures should keep journalists and Olympic fans protected -- preventative measures that NBC could have chosen to deliver with its report, except that they would undercut the narrative it was crafting. There is no doubt that the influx of out-of-town visitors presents an enticing target for aspiring hackers, but there's no reason to believe any device will be insta-compromised the moment it connects to the internet.

NBC, for its part, seems to think the only way to wipe this egg of its face is to apply more egg, as c|net reports:

"The claims made on the blog are completely without merit," according to a representative from NBC News.

The NBC rep also noted that the report made it clear from the beginning that the taping was done in Moscow. The report was intended to demonstrate that a person was more likely to be targeted by hackers while conducting searches in Russia, the representative added, acknowledging that these attacks can happen anywhere in the world. In addition, the story was designed to show how less technically savvy people can fall victim to such a cyberattack.

But NBC's story carried this headline:

Hacked Within Minutes: Sochi Visitors Face Internet Minefield

Even with the appended disclaimers, the report was obviously intended to present Sochi as a hackers' paradise where anyone -- even those not stupid enough to visit rogue websites or purposefully sideload sketchy apps -- can be compromised before their coffee cools. And the phrasing used by the reporters is equally as misleading. The following quotes are taken from the transcript (which, to NBC's credit, opens up with "Welcome to Moscow").

>> reporter: good evening, brian. the state department warns the travelers should have no expectation of privacy. even in their hotel rooms. you are immediately exposed as soon as you try to communicate with anything. one of the first thing visitors to russia will do is log on. hackers here will count on it. we decided to find out how dangerous that could be.

>> reporter: with our new computers loaded with attractive data, we headed for a restaurant, where we used a new smart phone to browse for information about the sochi olympics. almost immediately we were hacked.

>> did you see where it said downloading?

>> i did.

>> it's actually downloading a piece of malware.

>> malicious software hijacked our phone before i even started my coffee.

This would be the malware consciously downloaded by the reporter. Note that it's stated that the phone is downloading the malware on its own, rather than with any assistance by the journalists.

>> back at the hotel will hoyt was using specialized software to monitor my two computers. and sure enough, they had also been hacked.

No mention of visiting unknown sites. The assumption is that hackers accessed the computers on their own, rather than having a door propped open by Engel's visit to malicious sites, most likely sites that any decent browser/search engine would have warned might be an unsafe place to visit.

>> it had taken hackers less than one minute to pounce. within 24 hours they had broken into both computers and started helping themselves to my data.

"Pounce?" On what, the Welcome mat the journalists laid out? God helps those who help themselves to data, but the devil's editor visits compromised sites in search of a good story.

>> reporter: american athletes and fans now coming to russia by the thousands are entering a minefield. the instant they log on to the internet.

>> the best way to protect yourself is quite simple, if you don't really need a device, don't bring it. try to avoid the public wifi. and if there's anything particularly and uniquely important on your computer or phone, banking information or photographs, remove it before coming to russia.

"The instant they log on…" Obviously false. Pre-priming your devices for failure will "allow" you to be hacked before your coffee cools, but following some very basic security measures will keep devices safer. Sure, there's likely a higher concentration of hacking activity in Sochi with so many potential targets in the area, but that's no excuse to promote fear over facts and for journalists to intentionally sabotage their own equipment just to ensure the eyeball-grabbing headline actually fits the content. It's not just bad journalism, it's also irresponsible. NBC could have used this time to outline the same basic safety precautions Graham does in its blog post, but was obviously more interested in reinforcing its viewers' perception that Russia is the Internet Wild West, where even the safest surfer will be hacked to unrecognizability by malicious electro-bandits at the faintest whiff of a wi-fi signal.

Filed Under: hacking, olympics, richard engel, sochi
Companies: nbc

Olympic Athletes Told To Cover Apple Logos On Devices So Apple Doesn't Get Any Free Promotion

from the this-post-brought-to-you-by-olympic-censorship dept

For many years, we've pointed out the absolutely insane lengths the Olympics goes through to abuse trademark law to insane levels. It often requires host countries to pass special laws that give the Olympics powers that go beyond traditional trademark laws. And then, it does things like covering up the logos on toilets and sinks with tape, because those companies don't pay to be sponsors. It even launched an investigation at the last Olympics after it was discovered that athletes were having sex with non-sponsor condoms (Durex was the sponsor, but the condoms were not). Way back in 2006, we talked about how Apple was getting "free promotion" at the Olympics because tons of athletes were walking around using iPods with the iconic white earbuds, and reporters would ask them what they were listening to. We joked about the Olympic Committee telling athletes not to use Apple products.

Except, our joke has almost become reality. Apparently, athletes are being told to cover the Apple logo on any electronics they have, because Samsung is the big consumer electronics sponsor for this Olympics, and the Olympic Committee can't let any brand possibly get free support. And, apparently, because the Olympic Committee thinks everyone in the world is a moron who won't recognize that a MacBook with a piece of tape over the Apple is still a MacBook.

Filed Under: apple logo, olympics, sponsors, sponsorships
Companies: apple, samsung

Honesty Policy: Russia Making No Bones About Spying On Everyone During The Olympics

from the i-seeeeeeee-you dept

I'll give the Russian government this: they don't really pretend to be something they aren't. Unlike the US government's NSA spying program, which was only revealed through the leaks of now Russian house guest Edward Snowden, the Russian government wants you to know that they don't give a fly's poop about your civil liberties or anyone's concept of freedom of the press.

So says Russia, which has publically and completely above-board-ly announced that journalists covering the Olympic Games in Sochi will have their electronic communications monitored thoroughly by the Russian government.

A series of articles last fall revealed the amazing extent of the centralized surveillance, which exceeds the capabilities of the Chinese monitoring system at the Beijing games, and is given much wider latitude to eavesdrop than even our own NSA programs. The very communications infrastructure in Sochi was built to give government security systems full access, and not a single text message, email, or phone call will go un-monitored.

Russia's response has been a big shrug. Voice of Russia, an official government organ, published an article telling visitors not to be afraid—it's for your own security. Then, Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev signed a decree authorizing the government to collect all phone and internet data at the Olympics. The Committee to Protect Journalists notes that reporters are twice specifically highlighted as targets in the decree.

The whole "it's for your own good" line is a sham, of course. What the Russian government is actually worried about is any reporting on their own security flaws in the upcoming Games, along with the prospect of foreign journalists getting in contact with any activists, protesters, or opposition figures. But, hey, we're nitpicking here. The real story is that the Russian government gets the same spy-boners as the United States and the Chinese, but at least they tell you all about it. Like a peeping tom that sends you an Outlook calendar invite for when they'll be activating the toilet cams, or something.

This publicity is probably itself part of the program of staving off any real work journalists might want to do. But that's the beauty of it: they get to appear to be transparent while still retaining that good old fashion Orwellian feeling. So...progress?

Filed Under: intimidation, journalism, olympics, privacy, russia, sochi, surveillance