Tuesday, January 24, 2012

How To Get Blocked By Los Del Guardian

1st Dec 2011. It was a long time since WikiLeaks had handed Los Del Guardian the massive Cablegate scoop. After raking in the profits, journos at the UK Guardian newspaper had also successfully taken the lead in smearing Julian Assange to a global audience. Thanks to spineless toads like former WikiLeaks staffer James Ball, the enigmatic Australian was now widely smeared as an anti-Semite and a sexual deviant.

Guardian CEO Alan Rusbridger's hacks, including his brother-in-law David Leigh, couldn't help high-fiving each other:



Then WikiLeaks published the #SpyFiles, defying media reports that the organisation was set to disappear:




While the global media scrambled to report the latest WikiLeaks release, the Guardian completely ignored the story. I was not impressed :


 It was time to ask Los Del Guardian what was going on...



Finally one Guardian journo went off reservation, at least momentarily, and spoke the truth. James Ball tried to jump in and repair the damage:




James Ball kept insisting that this was old news. Just a bunch of brochures. Nothing newsworthy...



Oh dear.



I tried to point out the ridiculousness of this situation.



  I tried to contact James Ball again but suddenly I couldn't.


Yep, he blocked me.



But that's not all. Shortly thereafter I discovered that I was also blocked by Alan Rusbridger, David Leigh, and every other Guardian journalist I tried to contact. So... Did a Guardian editorial directive go out to the whole office, telling people to block me? For what? Telling them to report the news?





A bit of background: a few days earlier I had contacted dozens of Guardian journos by Twitter, trying to find just one single individual who did not agree with Rusbridger's negative opinions on Assange and WikiLeaks. Ryan Gallagher was the only one who responded with anything moderately supportive, but he soon backed off when pressed (from memory, he took the WikiLeaks Is Good But Assange Is Destroying It line, then told me to shut up).

So why didn't The Guardian want to report on WikiLeaks #SPYFILES release? Could it be that the UK's leading left-wing newspaper is really just another Guardian of the UK Establishment, protecting British companies doing secretive "security" business with despotic regimes around the world? Is that why the Guardian also redacted the names of multiple UK corporations from the #CABLEGATE release?

Yes.

It's what they like to call "national security". Like other newspaper chiefs, Alan Rusbridger gets invites to discuss it with the UK's top politicians and spy chiefs. In secretive meetings, they agree what can and cannot be reported in the media.

And WikiLeaks is a thorn in their sides.

Post Script: An excellent article on Spy Files by Pratap Chatterjee (not a Guardian journalist) was eventually posted in the Guardian's Comment Is Free opinion section (not "real" news). This appears to be the only Spy Files story run by the paper.

14 comments:

  1. Thought that @rj_gallagher was supportive of Wikileaks and Assange. Wrote a lot for the FrontLine Club @chthie

    ReplyDelete
  2. did you consider you might have just been blocked for trolling? do you really, seriously beleive any of this shit is true?!

    ReplyDelete
  3. I was blocked by David Leigh. Had my COURTEOUS comments blocked by the Guardian. I wasn't trolling. I didn't even tweet David Leigh. I just sent out general tweets expressing my opinion.

    Jaraparilla has my respect & I'm a fan of his work. I agree with everything he says in this blog. The Guardian censors ppl. David Leigh has done a great deal of harm to the paper.

    @cthie

    ReplyDelete
  4. what's kind of funny is i was working on james ball's interp of the lousy charlie beckett lecture the night before at LSE on the way to the city U lecture.
    we got into a little tweet reparte.
    he is always so kind to respond, even when my prowikileaks agenda is a little too plain.
    i've also been after him for the guardian's racism about the london riots.
    so it seems the wikileaks ninjas were busy december 1.
    what's also funny also is i got jamserbuk to admit the charlie lecture was empty regurgitative and devoid of content.
    that charlie alternated between bromance crushing on assange admiration, and careful homophobic dissing him as "eccentric" and also that he was not up to date on any of the latest hacks, economic issues, and columbia sneakers antiwikileaks fog disinfo.
    the spyfiles data may be new to people who do not study surveillance industries.
    for experts in that field it might have been more of a synthetic branding point.
    i really appreciate wikileaks getting the points over to a larger audience who are overly trusting of facebook and quite ignorant of surveillance mapping.
    so their dismissiveness i account to typical evolutionary biology.
    they did not want to be upstaged in their fictitious top primate role, and the guardian's history of gagging and state servility continues with promoting the fantasy world of no spy files.
    thanks for busting their collective media blackout.
    its interesting how these blackouts run.

    ReplyDelete
  5. maybe they didn't report the spy files because they reported much of this surveillance stuff almost a full month before??? http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2011/nov/01/governments-hacking-techniques-surveillance

    ReplyDelete
  6. LOL n00b. That was a great story by Ryan Gallagher and even quoted JAcob Applebaum. But as you say, it was a full month before the Spy Files release - why not follow it up with the WikiLeaks story? Gallagher mentions UK's Hampshire-based Gamma International, which was already exposed in Egypt, plus an Italian company, and then...? What about all the others?

    Any large WikiLeaks release is NEWSWORTHY and every other media organisation in the world picked up this story. Not the Guardian. Why not?

    I wish I could write it off as petty jealousy from Leigh and Co. But it's more than that.

    ReplyDelete
  7. but they did follow it up? http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/dec/02/cyber-industrial-complex-spying

    ReplyDelete
  8. Suggest you actually READ the blog post Noob. That story was already mentioned. It was posted in the "Comment Is Free" OPINION section by a person who is not a Guardian journalist.

    You have to wonder what Guardian readers made of it: an opinion piece about news they never even heard about? Pfft.

    ReplyDelete
  9. but surely the fact they've posted the opinon piece, which links to the wikileaks website and the spy files page, kind of refutes your suggestion that the Guardian was involved in "secret meetings" with "top politicians and spy chiefs" where they decided to not report the files? it doesn't matter if it is opinion or not. it is still being covered. and the guy that wrote the piece is a freelance by the looks of it, same as Gallagher, who you mention.

    do you really think the Guardian sent out an "editorial directive" to block you? sorry but this all looks rather crazy to me

    ReplyDelete
  10. OK n00b so now you have read the article it might be time to click through the links. This is not a one-off for the Guardianistas, it's part of a pattern of deliberate smear and distortion when it comes to WikiLeaks: http://wlcentral.org/node/2363

    And whether there was an editorial directive or not, Leigh, Rusbridger, Ball and others all blocked me simultaneously. Fact.

    ReplyDelete
  11. they probably blocked you because you were trolling them with all this silly stuff about "editorial directives" and "secret meetings" with "top politicians and spy chiefs". it seems like you have your own little narrative and you just want to believe it no matter what. i was actually wondering if maybe you had asperger's or something because im pretty sure the obsessive behavior displayed in this blog post isn't normal.

    ReplyDelete
  12. N00b, before all this Murdoch hackgate stuff exploded, Scotland Yard and MI5 chiefs acknowledged publicly that they have regular meetings with UK media chiefs. If that sounds like a crazy conspiracy theory to you, then I suggest you read a bit more and write a bit less.

    ReplyDelete
  13. By the way, n00b, I notice you work for Sky News in the UK. You really should be better informed, mate.

    ReplyDelete
  14. sky news?! where did you get that? they are an isp & i use proxy. talk about paranoia.

    still don't buy your "secret meetings" thing. sounds like a load of hysterical garbage. show me some real evidence. until then...

    ReplyDelete