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
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Britain's response to the NSA story? Back off and shut up - MOD issues D-notice to BBC etc
Last edited Wed Jun 19, 2013, 05:36 PM - Edit history (2)
Britain's response to the NSA story? Back off and shut up
Snowden's revelations are causing outrage in the US. In the UK, Hague deploys a police-state defence and the media is silenced
Simon Jenkins
The Guardian, Wednesday 19 June 2013
(Video)
William Hague told the Commons that every intercept had to be personally signed by him. Link to video: NSA Prism programme: William Hague makes statement on GCHQ
On Monday the Guardian carried a story that British intelligence had spied on delegates at two G20 summits, those chaired by Gordon Brown in 2009. Laptops and mobile phones had been hacked, and internet cafes installed and bugged. With many of the same heads of government gathering for the G8 summit in Northern Ireland, the story was, to put it mildly, sensational.
...
... The source was the American whistleblower, Edward Snowden, whose revelations about the US National Security Agency had been running in the Guardian and Washington Post for a week. It was initially hinted at by other British media but was covered by a D-notice (warning against publishing anything that could damage national security) from the government.
It vanished from general view. When the foreign secretary, William Hague, was questioned by the BBC on Monday, no mention was made of the affair. The media has been bidden to ignore the story and has done so. This was despite it running in leading newspapers round the world, from America and Europe to China and Russia.
Complaints at the bugging from governments in Turkey, South Africa and Germany have poured into the Foreign Office, yet the nearest British journalists can get to the story is to report the protests as foreign news.
...
What matters here is first the mendacity. I see no problem in exchanging data between British and American security – except where, as in the NSA's Prism program, it is a device to circumvent legal constraint. There may be few people in Washington or London who really seek a global data empire through blackmailing the world's population; but hoovering intelligence on millions of private individuals extends far beyond the needs of national security, beyond the needs even of normal police work. The war on terror is rotting the internal organs of free states.
...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jun/19/uk-response-to-nsa-story-back-off-shut-up
Snowden's revelations are causing outrage in the US. In the UK, Hague deploys a police-state defence and the media is silenced
Simon Jenkins
The Guardian, Wednesday 19 June 2013
(Video)
William Hague told the Commons that every intercept had to be personally signed by him. Link to video: NSA Prism programme: William Hague makes statement on GCHQ
On Monday the Guardian carried a story that British intelligence had spied on delegates at two G20 summits, those chaired by Gordon Brown in 2009. Laptops and mobile phones had been hacked, and internet cafes installed and bugged. With many of the same heads of government gathering for the G8 summit in Northern Ireland, the story was, to put it mildly, sensational.
...
... The source was the American whistleblower, Edward Snowden, whose revelations about the US National Security Agency had been running in the Guardian and Washington Post for a week. It was initially hinted at by other British media but was covered by a D-notice (warning against publishing anything that could damage national security) from the government.
It vanished from general view. When the foreign secretary, William Hague, was questioned by the BBC on Monday, no mention was made of the affair. The media has been bidden to ignore the story and has done so. This was despite it running in leading newspapers round the world, from America and Europe to China and Russia.
Complaints at the bugging from governments in Turkey, South Africa and Germany have poured into the Foreign Office, yet the nearest British journalists can get to the story is to report the protests as foreign news.
...
What matters here is first the mendacity. I see no problem in exchanging data between British and American security – except where, as in the NSA's Prism program, it is a device to circumvent legal constraint. There may be few people in Washington or London who really seek a global data empire through blackmailing the world's population; but hoovering intelligence on millions of private individuals extends far beyond the needs of national security, beyond the needs even of normal police work. The war on terror is rotting the internal organs of free states.
...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jun/19/uk-response-to-nsa-story-back-off-shut-up
Yeah! Looks like the UK has even more transparency than we do!
22 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
so suck it up, buttercup!
Last edited Wed Jun 19, 2013, 06:15 PM - Edit history (1)
News / World news / Censorship
MoD serves news outlets with D notice over surveillance leaks
BBC and other media groups issued with D notice to limit publication of information that could 'jeopardise national security'
Josh Halliday
The Guardian, Monday 17 June 2013 20.54 BST
It is not clear what impact the censorship warning has had on media coverage of Snowden’s revelations relating to British intelligence. Photograph: Handout/Reuters
Defence officials issued a confidential D notice to the BBC and other media groups in an attempt to censor coverage of surveillance tactics employed by intelligence agencies in the UK and US.
Editors were asked not to publish information that may "jeopardise both national security and possibly UK personnel" in the warning issued on 7 June, a day after the Guardian first revealed details of the National Security Agency's (NSA) secret Prism programme.
The D notice, which was marked "private and confidential: not for publication, broadcast or use on social media", was made public on the Westminster gossip blog, Guido Fawkes. Although only advisory for editors, the self-censorship system is intended to prevent the media from making "inadvertent public disclosure of information that would compromise UK military and intelligence operations and methods".
The warning was issued by defence officials in the UK as the BBC, ITN, Sky News and other newspapers and broadcasters around the world covered the surveillance revelations disclosed by the NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden. The leaks, reported extensively in the Guardian and also the Washington Post, have made headlines on both sides of the Atlantic for more than a week.
...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/17/defence-d-bbc-media-censor-surveillance-security
MoD serves news outlets with D notice over surveillance leaks
BBC and other media groups issued with D notice to limit publication of information that could 'jeopardise national security'
Josh Halliday
The Guardian, Monday 17 June 2013 20.54 BST
It is not clear what impact the censorship warning has had on media coverage of Snowden’s revelations relating to British intelligence. Photograph: Handout/Reuters
Defence officials issued a confidential D notice to the BBC and other media groups in an attempt to censor coverage of surveillance tactics employed by intelligence agencies in the UK and US.
Editors were asked not to publish information that may "jeopardise both national security and possibly UK personnel" in the warning issued on 7 June, a day after the Guardian first revealed details of the National Security Agency's (NSA) secret Prism programme.
The D notice, which was marked "private and confidential: not for publication, broadcast or use on social media", was made public on the Westminster gossip blog, Guido Fawkes. Although only advisory for editors, the self-censorship system is intended to prevent the media from making "inadvertent public disclosure of information that would compromise UK military and intelligence operations and methods".
The warning was issued by defence officials in the UK as the BBC, ITN, Sky News and other newspapers and broadcasters around the world covered the surveillance revelations disclosed by the NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden. The leaks, reported extensively in the Guardian and also the Washington Post, have made headlines on both sides of the Atlantic for more than a week.
...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/17/defence-d-bbc-media-censor-surveillance-security
Was very surprised when they went all but silent on this story after the summit spying revelations. Then we discovered a D-Notice had been sent to the UK press. They don't have to stop talking about it, they're just "urged" not to report anything that might harm national security. Which means, yeah, STFU.
Now in fairness, I've found the UK press to be far more transparent and free than ours on most issues. I don't even bother watching anything but the local news anymore, and that only for the weather.
But this was a little jarring. I had no idea the UK could shut a story down with a formal notice.
Of course here, censorship happens without notice. 
I love reading and listening to Brits tear a subject down to its nuts and bolts. Prolly why I married one. 
I liked the part about putting it in terms they can understand Especially on the heels of the Jimmy Savile scandal
I expect the Guardian will keep right on poking the hornet's nest since a lot of it won't have to do with GCHQ (I'm guessing). And that's not a bad thing. It's also driving readership in a positive way for them. I've always liked the Guardian.
Oh now, Catherina, you know the apparatus isn't put in place to catch the elite at their little "games". It's just us peons they're interested in keeping tabs on. 
Uk To Brit Hacks: Shut Up
Defence Ministry Warns Against Leaks on Joint US-Brit Spying
Warning follows exposé of UK cooperation in massive warrantless US government electronic spying
FRIDAY, JUNE 7, 2013
A British Defense Ministry press advisory committee, reacting to a flurry of revelations in the American press about massive warrantless US government electronic surveillance programs, quietly warned UK organizations Friday not to publish British national security information.
Defiance of the advisory could make British journalists vulnerable to prosecution under the Official Secrets Act.
The June 7 "DA-Notice," or Defence Advisory Notice, which was itself confidential, accepted that the U.S. National Security Agency was sharing information gleaned from the surveillance programs with its British counterparts, and said UK intelligence organizations were worried about revelations of their own roles in the programs
...
The notice itself was marked "Private and Confidential: Not for publication, broadcast or use on social media."
...
The worry is that British authorities may be preparing to pursue reporters through the courts if they publish details on UK participation in the massive US electronic surveillance programs, code-named "PRISM" and "BLARNEY," according to a report in The Washington Post.
...
http://www.andmagazine.com/content/phoenix/13003.html
Defence Ministry Warns Against Leaks on Joint US-Brit Spying
Warning follows exposé of UK cooperation in massive warrantless US government electronic spying
FRIDAY, JUNE 7, 2013
A British Defense Ministry press advisory committee, reacting to a flurry of revelations in the American press about massive warrantless US government electronic surveillance programs, quietly warned UK organizations Friday not to publish British national security information.
Defiance of the advisory could make British journalists vulnerable to prosecution under the Official Secrets Act.
The June 7 "DA-Notice," or Defence Advisory Notice, which was itself confidential, accepted that the U.S. National Security Agency was sharing information gleaned from the surveillance programs with its British counterparts, and said UK intelligence organizations were worried about revelations of their own roles in the programs
...
The notice itself was marked "Private and Confidential: Not for publication, broadcast or use on social media."
...
The worry is that British authorities may be preparing to pursue reporters through the courts if they publish details on UK participation in the massive US electronic surveillance programs, code-named "PRISM" and "BLARNEY," according to a report in The Washington Post.
...
http://www.andmagazine.com/content/phoenix/13003.html