« Legal drugs hell | Main | New nukes : new lies »

July 27, 2011


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Paul Flynn

For the Britsih paliament the rules were laid down when parliament was first televised. many MPs were nervous then. Many still might be now. Most would think that reforms are overdue.


I hate to keep throwing in unrelated items simply because your mention of IT gives me a dubious opening.

But Graham Linehan posted this in relation to C4+1 not showing the Daily Show Global Edition

"I was curious as to why an episode of The Daily Show that would have been of particular interest to the UK public--covering, as it did, the News of The World scandal--would not be shown in this country. I tweeted @C4insider.
@C4Insider what were the compliance problems for Daily Show? Out of curiosity.
July 26, 2011 at 16:30
@glinner Will do some investigating and get back to you.
July 26, 2011 at 17:04
Well. You'll never guess.
Asked Channel 4 why the latest Daily Show isn't being shown on 4+1 (HT: @chrisspyrou) and got the following reply...
July 26, 2011 at 22:44
@Glinner We are prevented by parliamentary rules from broadcasting parliamentary proceedings in a comedic or satrical context.
July 26, 2011 at 21:40
Oh, OK.

Wait, what?

@Glinner C4's restriction led by this guidance (FOIA response), specifically section 4: http://bit.ly/n48eaa
July 26, 2011 at 22:53
@Glinner Aimed at "preserving the dignity of the House", I think.
July 26, 2011 at 22:57
Holy shit! So politicians in the UK...
@Glinner Same in Ireland. Smallprint under "Rules of Coverage": http://www.oireachtas.ie/parliament/watchlisten/
July 26, 2011 at 22:54
....so politicians in the UK and Ireland are protected from satirical TV programs by the law? But only if they're for national consumption? REALLY?

Surely a situation that should change? Don't we think?


I look forward to reading (well, skimming) this report. I would be nice if the civil service took notice, and began employing people with the technical background needed to do the job, rather just a stream of PPE graduates from the usual universities.

Paul Flynn

Thanks Huw. The abiding impression of the PASC inquiry is that decisions of monumental importance are being taken by people with little understanding of IT. Probably applies to the courts too.

Paul Flynn

Thanks for all the comments. They say rather more than we said in our Select Committee Report.


This is also serious..

Our court seems to have misunderstood how the web works and the appeals court have upheld that fundamental misunderstanding.
Effectively, according to the thinking here, everything anyone ever does on the web is technically infringing.

Just by clicking on the link to your site Paul, my browser created a copy of this page and so now I'm infringing.

Is that it, is that where it will end up.
Internet shut down in Britain, rest of the world cut off?

Andy Thomson

Finally, a government committee that realise a small number of large IT suppliers are taking us all for chumps.

Let's hope they also realise what a joke government IT security is. My GP has gone over to the national NHS system reassuring patients that it was secure. When I challenged their so called security and pointed out all the flaws I could see from the reception area they were gob smacked!

When the DHSS CDs went missing it hit the news and many of the news pictures came from outside the office in question with all the computer screens clearly visible through the windows.

Government might have log in protocols in place, but until somebody really gets a grip the physical security of our data it is open to anybody with an agenda to steal at will.


Corporations get ripped off in the same way, but still somehow think they are saving money with incredibly expensive mice, keyboards etc, instead of just employing a person or group of people to handle the purchasing, maintenance and replacement of equipment.

As a mildly related issue,
legislation intended to block child porn websites is now being ordered by courts to block access to usenet index sites
This is excellent, once we have that established as reasonable we can block any sites we like, whether for political opinions we don't like or just because we can. The best thing about blocking sites is that users in the UK may not even know about the existence of sites that are blocked to them.
Well okay, blocks are easy to get around, so the only people who won't get to sites being blocked are those who didn't know about them in the first place.
But what are rugs for if not to hide things beneath.

virginia driver improvement program

ourney brought up some key points and best practices. thanks for the news sharing

The comments to this entry are closed.