Brier Still Doesn’t

When everyone beat me up for speaking the truth about pretexting, I argued that “it wasn’t clearly illegal when Dunn did it”.  I was, like many others, assuming that the hasty California law passage would take hold.

Who would have thought?  The law flopped.  It’s still not clearly illegal.

OK, we know that Brier doesn’t pretext, and neither does Scoble.  I’m still trying to find out who I really am, but I don’t knowingly pretext.  But the three of us being great people doesn’t change the fact that it happens — a LOT.

What really intrigues me, though, is how the press again turns this into a boogey dance.  “Bad MPAA!!”.  “Everyone hates pretexting; only Dunn (and now MPAA) do it!!”

Are we to really believe that only MPAA, and Dunn were doing it?  Who was paying all of those P.I.s?  This whole fiasco has changed absolutely nothing.  If there is a lesson to be learned, it is “don’t investigate reporters the same way you would investigate a cheating spouse, or they’ll ruin you”.  Everyone else can apparently pretext away indiscriminately.  Some custodians we have.

 

3 Comments

  • You’re right, the outcome was unbelievable. Have you been following the Clive Goodman case? He’s a British reporter busted for tapping royal phone lines, not exactly pretexting but in the same bucket: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,1959754,00.html?gusrc=rss&feed=1

  • Wow, that’s crazy — the guy in Britain apparently ran a crisis-management consultancy? It’s like police who go bad, I suppose.

  • Another part of the case in Britain is the financial motivation of the tabloids there. Sort of like the Jayson Blair case and others I recall here. This is one thing that bothers me about the decline of local papers here in the U.S. Less money in local papers means more “citizen journalism”, which could have some real conflicts of interest. At least we were familiar with the old conflicts of interest.

Leave a Reply

Your email is never shared.Required fields are marked *