Sky News gets in on the Hacking Scandal
Discussion
Eric Mc said:
That's not a valid point either.
Breaking or entering something you should not have broken into or entered is the crime.
Not really. If you wander into someone's garden and peek through their window the outcome is predictable. You won't be charged with a crime and the homeowners won't get £60K compo. I was momentarily outraged when I heard journalists had deleted messages from the Dowler girl's phone but apparently that was made up. I'm also happy for people who 'hack' (is there no other word) into voicemail to be relieved of their jobs but the public resource that has gone into these investigations is little short of outrageous.Breaking or entering something you should not have broken into or entered is the crime.
carmonk said:
Eric Mc said:
So you've never heard of a Peeping Tom?
No, I've never heard of a person being charged with voyeurism without a sexual element. Please provide some links.http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1997/40/sectio...
Oakey said:
According to the news not only did they hack Darwins email account they then passed on these emails to the police and they were used as evidence in the case against him?
I may be mixing US law here but iirc courts don't give a st if evidence was illegally obtained so long as the police didn't break the law themselves.Oakey said:
According to the news not only did they hack Darwins email account they then passed on these emails to the police and they were used as evidence in the case against him?
I think that may be the jist of it. At the rate they're going I reckon next week may be a good week to go robbing in London - there'll be no policemen left in the Met...carmonk said:
Eric Mc said:
So "spying" on someone is a crime.
As has already been covered, no, it's normally not.If you systematically set up an unauthorised surveillance over a period of time, it most definitely cam be a crime.
Haviong said all that, I don't think what Sky did in this instance is anything like what Nes of the Woprld were up to.
Of all the Sky TV operations, the only one of which I have any regard for is Sky News and the sooner they are completely separate from the influence of the Murdochs, the better for them. It would be a real shame if they ended up suffereing because of the cary on of their (part) owners.
Edited by Eric Mc on Friday 6th April 09:01
Eric Mc said:
carmonk said:
Eric Mc said:
So "spying" on someone is a crime.
As has already been covered, no, it's normally not.If you systematically set up an unauthorised surveillance over a period of time, it most definitely cam be a crime.
Haviong said all that, I don't think what Sky did in this instance is anything like what Nes of the Woprld were up to.
Of all the Sky TV operations, the only one of which I have any regard for is Sky News and the sooner they are completely separate from the influence of the Murdochs, the better for them. It would be a real shame if they ended up suffereing because of the cary on of their (part) owners.
Edited by Eric Mc on Friday 6th April 09:01
DJRC said:
Not really, its in technical innovation aswell.
Sport coverage on TV is in a different league now to back in the day. Sky+/tivi like stuff and multiroom would be unheard of without Sky in the UK and Europe. There was *no* incentive to innovate before Sky.
That makes no sense at all. How can you say that PVRs wouldn't have been introduced around the same time by another satellite company (as they were across the world)?Sport coverage on TV is in a different league now to back in the day. Sky+/tivi like stuff and multiroom would be unheard of without Sky in the UK and Europe. There was *no* incentive to innovate before Sky.
Multiroom is more of a billing innovation than anything else. And as for any other innovation as regards image and sound quality, such as high definition, you need to look to the BBC and their Japanese counterpart NHK rather than Sky.
What they have done is use existing technical innovations to their financial advantage. There's no shame in that (done properly), but they certainly have not been responsible for very much, if any, technical innovation of their own.
davepoth said:
That makes no sense at all. How can you say that PVRs wouldn't have been introduced around the same time by another satellite company (as they were across the world)?
Multiroom is more of a billing innovation than anything else. And as for any other innovation as regards image and sound quality, such as high definition, you need to look to the BBC and their Japanese counterpart NHK rather than Sky.
What they have done is use existing technical innovations to their financial advantage. There's no shame in that (done properly), but they certainly have not been responsible for very much, if any, technical innovation of their own.
Indeed. It is technology itself that has improved TV coverage, not the method of presentation. In fact one thing with Sky is how dreadful some of their sports coverage is. Their rugby commentators vary from poor to dreaful sometimes. Stuart I've got to say something absolutely stupid and indefensible every play Barnes often makes me turn the sound down. Multiroom is more of a billing innovation than anything else. And as for any other innovation as regards image and sound quality, such as high definition, you need to look to the BBC and their Japanese counterpart NHK rather than Sky.
What they have done is use existing technical innovations to their financial advantage. There's no shame in that (done properly), but they certainly have not been responsible for very much, if any, technical innovation of their own.
There was no 'incentive' for the BBC to improve their F1 coverage yet it is superb, improving year on year. The incentive to improve when the monopoly of Sky bec ome a reality.
I can't say I enjoy Sky's sports coverage, as they insist on padding everything out with endless punditry and analysis. Very much style over content a lot of the time. Plus of course the presentation style is ludicrously overblown...
"SKY MONDAY NIGHT FOOTBALL! EXCITING PREMIER LEAGUE ACTION FEATURING...um, Wigan and Bolton".
Their F1 ads are doing it as well, especially on Spotify. It's not "F1 on Sky", it's "F1 ON SKY!".
"SKY MONDAY NIGHT FOOTBALL! EXCITING PREMIER LEAGUE ACTION FEATURING...um, Wigan and Bolton".
Their F1 ads are doing it as well, especially on Spotify. It's not "F1 on Sky", it's "F1 ON SKY!".
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff