Dirty Politics: Nicky Hager's New Book

Forums › Politics › Dirty Politics: Nicky Hager's New Book

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | ... | 18

320 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 56
Inactive user

Reply # 1109202 15-Aug-2014 18:19

The real problem for me with the book, is that it is doesn't just admit to being based on stolen data, but that there are people who claim here and elsewhere this is okay. I do not want to have to write every email that I only send to friends and acquaintances, in lawyer speak, in case I suddenly become "politically suitable" to be a target to have my email hacked. This is not a good precedent, if Hagar gets away with it. He should be done for receiving stolen goods, as should anyone who deals in hacked emails.

Leaked emails are another matter. But to compare hacking with leaking is self-serving. Leaking is where one party who was a valid and legal recipient, gives out the data. Hacking is illegal access bypassing what prevents anyone but the legitimate owner accessing it.

Ask yourself: are you politically active, even on a blog or forum? Are you okay with any of the people who post to the blog or forum and agree with you getting hacked, because it's politically expedient? If you say that it is okay to hack someone on the right's email, then when it happens to someone on the left, you won't complain? It'll be just as valid in your eyes, right?

ajobbins

Awesome
4811 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1062

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 1109213 15-Aug-2014 18:36

4 people support this post

rmt38: The real problem for me with the book, is that it is doesn't just admit to being based on stolen data, but that there are people who claim here and elsewhere this is okay. I do not want to have to write every email that I only send to friends and acquaintances, in lawyer speak, in case I suddenly become "politically suitable" to be a target to have my email hacked. This is not a good precedent, if Hagar gets away with it. He should be done for receiving stolen goods, as should anyone who deals in hacked emails.

Leaked emails are another matter. But to compare hacking with leaking is self-serving. Leaking is where one party who was a valid and legal recipient, gives out the data. Hacking is illegal access bypassing what prevents anyone but the legitimate owner accessing it.

Ask yourself: are you politically active, even on a blog or forum? Are you okay with any of the people who post to the blog or forum and agree with you getting hacked, because it's politically expedient? If you say that it is okay to hack someone on the right's email, then when it happens to someone on the left, you won't complain? It'll be just as valid in your eyes, right?

I can kinda see where you are coming from, however - from Hagar's point of view, he was leaked information, he didn't steal it. Does it really matter where it came from? What if the source was anonymous and he didn't know it was 'stolen'?

Upon receiving the information, unsolicited I believe, he decided that some of the information met the threshold of public interest, and carefully released that information whilst ensuring that other information not meeting the threshold was destroyed.

Journalists have and need the freedom to make such discretions, ESPECIALLY when it shows corruption or wrongdoing among those in powerful positions. Deny them that right to all of our peril. (And note that this doesn't mean carte blanche on anything they come across).

Twitter: ajobbins

MikeB4

13340 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6274

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 1109217 15-Aug-2014 18:42

4 people support this post

Hager is not a professional journalist, he is a political activist.

Mike
Retired IT Manager.
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

Mac user, Windows curser, Chrome OS desired.

The great divide is the lies from both sides.

rmt38

320 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 56
Inactive user

Reply # 1109223 15-Aug-2014 18:53

ajobbins:
rmt38: The real problem for me with the book, is that it is doesn't just admit to being based on stolen data, but that there are people who claim here and elsewhere this is okay. I do not want to have to write every email that I only send to friends and acquaintances, in lawyer speak, in case I suddenly become "politically suitable" to be a target to have my email hacked. This is not a good precedent, if Hagar gets away with it. He should be done for receiving stolen goods, as should anyone who deals in hacked emails.

Leaked emails are another matter. But to compare hacking with leaking is self-serving. Leaking is where one party who was a valid and legal recipient, gives out the data. Hacking is illegal access bypassing what prevents anyone but the legitimate owner accessing it.

Ask yourself: are you politically active, even on a blog or forum? Are you okay with any of the people who post to the blog or forum and agree with you getting hacked, because it's politically expedient? If you say that it is okay to hack someone on the right's email, then when it happens to someone on the left, you won't complain? It'll be just as valid in your eyes, right?

I can kinda see where you are coming from, however - from Hagar's point of view, he was leaked information, he didn't steal it. Does it really matter where it came from? What if the source was anonymous and he didn't know it was 'stolen'?

I don't care if the target is Labour or National, this is about precedent to me. You don't even have all the details, and you are justifying his actions.

What I mean by all the details is that Hagar has stated clearly he knew it was stolen. This is not disputed, except by those who either ignore it, or haven't read it. This was why he didn't act to verify any of the information. After all, isn't it possible his source modified some pieces? How does he know, if the source isn't available, that this isn't a honey trap by Slater and National? Instead, he went under the radar, and just put it all out there, out of context or not.

You can argue that it was leaked to him, despite me clearly differentiating between the two above.

This is a bad precedent. Someone stole something. Someone knowingly received it. And people are justifying it with semantic arguments about how it wasn't theft (without any substantiation) but leaking, and how it is right because it is political. Wait until someone does this to you, or someone you know. And that someone knew it was stolen, and took what you said out of context, I hope you come back to your post and read over what you have written.

Justify this over and over as leaking. Justify it as okay because it happened to someone you don't like (and I don't like). But this looks like a crime by Hagar, that we should be all against, at our own peril if we aren't.

alasta

4134 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 754

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 1109237 15-Aug-2014 19:42

2 people support this post

I'm not condoning the theft of information, or even the disclosure of leaked information, but I'm surprised at how indiscreet some people are with their email correspondence. Through clumsy forwarding, mistaken addressing, etc. emails have the potential to end up anywhere and I always write emails on that understanding.

rmt38

320 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 56
Inactive user

Reply # 1109249 15-Aug-2014 20:06

alasta: I'm not condoning the theft of information, or even the disclosure of leaked information, but I'm surprised at how indiscreet some people are with their email correspondence. Through clumsy forwarding, mistaken addressing, etc. emails have the potential to end up anywhere and I always write emails on that understanding.

As do I, but even that only gets you so far. How do you know what is going to be contentious at a later date? How do you know what context you do not include because the recipient is familiar with it, will through it's lack allow an email to be read in a different way by an unintended recipient?

I would be surprised if you were to state that none of your emails written this way, could ever be misconstrued given the above, or any similar situation.

NonprayingMantis

6434 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1571

Reply # 1109250 15-Aug-2014 20:11

One person supports this post

interesting how everyone is using the words 'stolen' and 'theft'.

I thought that if the piracy threads taught us anything, it is that copying information is not the same as stealing it.

Accessing and copying someone elses emails and facebook messages is not theft. It is a different kind of crime altogether.

MikeB4

13340 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6274

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 1109253 15-Aug-2014 20:24

NonprayingMantis: interesting how everyone is using the words 'stolen' and 'theft'.

I thought that if the piracy threads taught us anything, it is that copying information is not the same as stealing it.

Accessing and copying someone elses emails and facebook messages is not theft. It is a different kind of crime altogether.

That depends on the interpretation of the definition.

Mike
Retired IT Manager.
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

Mac user, Windows curser, Chrome OS desired.

The great divide is the lies from both sides.

Glassboy

834 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 260

Trusted

Reply # 1109257 15-Aug-2014 20:32

NonprayingMantis: interesting how everyone is using the words 'stolen' and 'theft'.

I thought that if the piracy threads taught us anything, it is that copying information is not the same as stealing it.

Accessing and copying someone elses emails and facebook messages is not theft. It is a different kind of crime altogether.

What you are doing is called sophism.

turnin

509 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 155
Inactive user

Reply # 1109297 15-Aug-2014 21:00

KiwiNZ: Hager is not a professional journalist, he is a political activist.

His stories involve politics and many have been critical of Labour members, so the left wing accusations are just that
I'm guessing you havent read the book

MikeB4

13340 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6274

Trusted

Subscriber

Reply # 1109312 15-Aug-2014 21:15

turnin:
KiwiNZ: Hager is not a professional journalist, he is a political activist.

His stories involve politics and many have been critical of Labour members, so the left wing accusations are just that
I'm guessing you havent read the book

Did my post mention left or right? I did say he is political activist which he is.

Mike
Retired IT Manager.
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

Mac user, Windows curser, Chrome OS desired.

The great divide is the lies from both sides.

turnin

509 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 155
Inactive user

Reply # 1109375 16-Aug-2014 02:34

A swing activist aye. These dirty truth tellers, Next he'll be hiding out in the russian embassy.

matisyahu

1409 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 262

Subscriber

Reply # 1109398 16-Aug-2014 08:34

I can't help but be reminded of this video when hearing about 'nasty politics':

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_zTN4BXvYI

Laptop: MacBook Pro (15-inch, 2017)
Desktop: iMac (27-inch, 2017)
Smartphone: iPhone Xs Max 256GB 'Space Grey'
Additional devices: Unifi Security Gateway, Unifi Switch, Unifi AP AC HD, Unifi Cloud Key, Apple TV 4K 64GB
Services: iCloud, YouTube Premium, Wordpress, Skinny

Fred99

7530 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3949

Reply # 1109412 16-Aug-2014 09:39

One person supports this post

I'm sure Hager "leans to the left". For goodness sake, much of his focus has been on exposing the influence of "big business" in the political process, environmental issues etc.
To extend this to suggest that there's some kind of collusion between Hager and political parties on the left is a stretch of the imagination IMO. The LP under Cunliffe seems to have been unprepared to "make the most" of Hager's allegations. I get the feeling that if the shoe was on the other foot, and it was Slater's "investigative journalism" delivering bombshells against the LP, then there'd be a pre-informed, well coordinated and unified response from the right to maximise the damage.

gzt

10261 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1578

Reply # 1109421 16-Aug-2014 10:32

Hager friendly interview on tv3+1 now. I'd expect to hear more of his side of the story.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | ... | 18