Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Luminous Animal

(27,310 posts)

8. As if journalism won't be negatively affected. Who would be wllling to be a source

Reply to ProSense (Reply #6)

Tue May 14, 2013, 12:28 PM

May 2013

under these conditions. It was bullshit when the government collaborated the telcos outright illegal spying, it was bullshit when the telcos were given immunity from prosecution, it IS bullshit that a secret legal framework has been established to allow this unfettered spying on citizens and journalists.

And I won't click on your water-carrying blue links.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

14 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

When you obtain someone's phone records to determine EVERYONE they called, that is spying. [View all] Luminous Animal May 2013 OP

Yes, but...it's not the BFEE doing the spying, so it's okay. Common Sense Party May 2013 #1

And if they don't know the numbers called? How else would they find out? randome May 2013 #2

Overly broad, done in secret, and targeting journalists for reporting Luminous Animal May 2013 #3

Press freedom is not the same thing as subpoenaing phone records. randome May 2013 #5

Two months worth and over 100 journalists affected. It is a fishing Luminous Animal May 2013 #7

So what's the acceptable number of journalists for you? randome May 2013 #13

None. Journalists should be able to ensure confidential relationship with their sources. Luminous Animal May 2013 #14

Oh, that "freedom of the press" thingy is soooo 1789. And, so very inconvenient. Tierra_y_Libertad May 2013 #4

When you ProSense May 2013 #6

As if journalism won't be negatively affected. Who would be wllling to be a source Luminous Animal May 2013 #8

People ProSense May 2013 #9

Yes. Because information should ONLY be available to the public when approved by Luminous Animal May 2013 #10

Thank you for posting this n/t Yo_Mama May 2013 #11

You are welcome. Luminous Animal May 2013 #12