Ed, I wouldn't defend all the actions or secrecy of western democracies but one needs to perhaps be pragmatic about the need for the secrecy of a country's abilities and operations to protect against unfriendly nation threats. (Having been responsible at one time for info/cyber security in an organisation I know there are things regarding a company's technology and processes that I wouldn't want made public as it would help criminal "bad actors" if they wanted to target one.)Don't forget that in the UK MSM are subject to D/DMSA-Notices. True, these are only advisory but I'm sure in some cases there is significant pressure on editors to abide by them (I bet the authorities know some embarrassing personal details of some editors ...), although I suspect the media may be more willing to divulge information to the public than when government ministers, intelligent officers and newspaper editors probably knew each other from public school or Oxbridge ...https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/D-NoticeObviously, there are no such constraints on social media - although certain postings might still end up with the police knocking on one's door ... perhaps more likely in China and Russia than in the UK or US ... and this is something that becomes more complex with multinational social media and countries that apply laws outside of their territory, coupled with the potential risks of international arrest warrants - these days a number of politicians from Duncan Smith, to Putin, to Netanyahu have to be careful having either been sanctioned by China or subject to ICC arrest warrants. I don't think Hillsborough had anything do with national security, it seem to be deliverate disinformation by the police, passed on as misinformation by the press who seemed happy to believe the police, who as far as I'm aware, were just protecting their own peopleand organisation? Must admit as I'm not interested in football I've not followed it too closely - unfortunately, people were willing to believe the police's disinformation, perhapsbecauseof the minority of football fans who were hooligans? This comes into the category of organisations using their power to protect themselves - a recent example being the CofE until Welby had to resign - but previous ones in the business area being the Tabacco industry's denial of smoking causing health problems, the Sackler family Purdue company falsely claiming its opiod products weren't addictive, or Exxon burying the 1977 report by their scientists detailing that fossil fuels were a primary cause of climate change. Civil cases are different: the Jones and Giulliani cases are more comparable with the Manchester Arena conspiracy case where the plaintifs were awarded damages of £45,000 because of Hall's harmful, hurtful and stressful disinformation - only UK damage awards are usually significantly lower than in US. It's not about Jones, Giulliani, or Hall, it's about compensation for the harassment victims have suffered. Some might say the UK's compensation is inadquate, others that the the US's is excessive - not something I'm going to argue about as it's unlikely to change soon.
Michael Ixer ● 214d