Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Twitter Boots Critic of NBC For Tweeting Exec's Email Address

samzenpus posted about 2 years ago | from the was-that-wrong? dept.

Twitter 104

netbuzz writes "Guy Adams, a Los Angeles-based correspondent for The Independent of London, had his Twitter account suspended today, allegedly for having violated a Twitter privacy policy when he tweeted the workplace email address of an NBC Sports executive. The Internet is abuzz with accusations – no make that assumptions – that Twitter muzzled Adams because Adams was tweeting up a storm of protest over NBC's coverage of the Games. However, Twitter says it was because it prohibits the tweeting of 'non-public, personal email addresses.' Whether Adams did that or not appears debatable." Update: 07/31 17:48 GMT by S : Adams's Twitter account has been reinstated.

cancel ×

104 comments

I wonder (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40823591)

If the NBC executive had his email access cut for emailing the reporter's Twitter username.

HMMM (5, Interesting)

nopainogain (1091795) | about 2 years ago | (#40823611)

Comcast owns NBC... Comcast supports NDAA, NBC aligns itself with twitter which tries to silence whistleblower. I miss freedom.

Re:HMMM (5, Insightful)

zlives (2009072) | about 2 years ago | (#40823687)

freedom will be televised during highest paid ad time slots

Re:HMMM (1)

nopainogain (1091795) | about 2 years ago | (#40823701)

wish i had some mod points to mod ^this up.. nicely played.

Re:HMMM (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40824571)

Please explain what freedom you lost by this incident.

Hey Twitter, (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40823617)

#fuckyou

the email add. was out there. (4, Interesting)

gl4ss (559668) | about 2 years ago | (#40823623)

that's the debate if you're wondering.
if it wasn't public, how did he have it? personal relation? but no need for that since it was published on a blog.
and it's an email address for a fucking nbc exec, not for some secret agent...

and why it's a story is that there's moneyflow between olympics, nbc and twitter due to them doing big co-operation around the games.

and why nbc sucks is that they edited the opening ceremony and showed it time delayed(the reasoning is that americans are too stupid for the un-edited version, basically).

Re:the email add. was out there. (5, Informative)

Goose In Orbit (199293) | about 2 years ago | (#40823775)

Worse still - they went to commercial during the tribute to the victims of the 7/7 London bombing. Can you imagine how much trouble they'd be in for doing the same to the 9/11 victims?

Re:the email add. was out there. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40824017)

heh, not really defending them but i've seen them do the same during last year's 9/11 10 year anniversary thing where people were reading the names of the victims.

nbc coverage is the worst, but the IOC are enablers of this. NBC pays like $5 billion for the broadcast rights while the Canadian rights holder only has to pay $50 million. it's a lot easier to give live coverage when you don't have to re-coupe a few billion dollars of your investment.

american viewers can't even watch proper streams online. We have to be paid subscribers to some cable package. it sucks!

Re:the email add. was out there. (3, Informative)

nedlohs (1335013) | about 2 years ago | (#40824561)

It's an auction. What sort or retard would turn down a $5 billion bid and instead give it to the guy bidding $50 million?

And the $5 billion was for 4 Olympic games. NBC paid $2 billion total for two: the 2010 winter and the 2012 summer games.

Re:the email add. was out there. (2)

gl4ss (559668) | about 2 years ago | (#40826037)

It's an auction. What sort or retard would turn down a $5 billion bid and instead give it to the guy bidding $50 million?

And the $5 billion was for 4 Olympic games. NBC paid $2 billion total for two: the 2010 winter and the 2012 summer games.

the sort of retard who's anyhow arguing that it's not a business but a common cause for all mankind and thus worthy of exemptions and special protection with law? that's IOC's argument anyways. they're just not any games but given specific protection and freedom.. pretty much in the spirit that the games would be shown to all. of course the IOC members just want money though.

Re:the email add. was out there. (1)

DrXym (126579) | about 2 years ago | (#40826627)

What you do quite simply is set the terms that the broadcast rights are offered under. Make it mandatory that the opening / closing ceremonies be broadcast in full with a maximum time delay of (for example) 15 minutes, put time delay limits on other sporting events, put clear rules in place for the boundaries of acceptable / unacceptable commentary & coverage (e.g. of treating other nations respectfully), put limits on where and with what frequency advertising breaks may happen and generally strive to ensure the winning bid offers an optimal viewing experience.

If NBC doesn't want to bid under those terms it doesn't have to. Some other channel most surely would though.

Re:the email add. was out there. (1)

cayenne8 (626475) | about 2 years ago | (#40830027)

I'm not sure what the uproar of the time delay is...

I kind of liked having the opening ceremonies timed to show in the US, about dinner time.....

It makes it easier to catch the important things by broadcasting it after I get off work, and have my usual tv watching time...

Re:the email add. was out there. (0, Flamebait)

Johann Lau (1040920) | about 2 years ago | (#40824053)

Why would anyone hold a moment of silence now, 7 years later? Because it's just such a great opportunity to advertise for the police state? Seems cynical, and cutting to different, more local commercials elsewhere seems sensible. After all, americans cannot buy the product that is sold with that moment, they are buying their own brand from their own politicians.

I cannot for the life of me figure out why this sentence is in the WP article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_July_2005_London_bombings [wikipedia.org]

The attack happened 24 hours after the city was selected to host the 2012 Summer Olympics.

That's kinda freaky [youtube.com] , combined with that IMHO utterly fucking random "tribute" to the victims of those bombings. Unless of course the bombers stated that the London Olympics decision was their reason for the bombing, or something like that, you might as well say "the bombings took place 3 days after Edward Pillowtree of Southampton turned 87".

A very cynical person might point out that the decision to hold the Olympics there, as well as the attack, definitely facilitated a lot of new toys and powers for the (London) police, while it is unclear what they achieved for radical Islam, other than turning people away from it. But I'm not bothering with conspiracy theories anymore, none of the fuckers involved are worth it. I'm basically just saying "heh, so what." If they're riding the victims of those bombings that's bad enough, why should anyone else watch in on that? It's exactly like 9/11, in that unless you're caught in the hype, you can only shrug, and maybe get a flame-proof suit because you'll need it.

One thing is sure for me: The Olympics are a gigantic jerkfest; anyone involved, and anyone angry about any details of the broadcast is such a gigantic fuckwit, that any and all squabbles among you seem non-existant from this distance. It's just different stripes of the same bullshit.

Re:the email add. was out there. (2)

RaceProUK (1137575) | about 2 years ago | (#40826573)

Or the tribute was in there purely because of the proximity of the events in 2005.

Re:the email add. was out there. (-1, Troll)

Johann Lau (1040920) | about 2 years ago | (#40828767)

Flamebait? Don't fucking flatter yourselves. If this offends you, I positively don't want to hear a peep from your dumb fucking ass. And that is what really pisses you off, isn't it ^^

Re:the email add. was out there. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40824091)

Sock puppet simple -- [1]NBC is selling entertainment. [2]They don't do real-time every-second coverage. [3]They make money by inserting commercials. Result: they took out the bit that would have everyone thinking about the terrorism of the past years instead of the Games.

How is this a friggin surprise? It's a sensible business decision. Hate NBC for things that are actually wrong.

Re:the email add. was out there. (2)

MickyTheIdiot (1032226) | about 2 years ago | (#40824155)

And always these arguments make the assumption that doing something that nets you one dollar more is ALWAYS the right thing to do.

That's a great way to get around the philosophical problem of morality, isn't it?

Re:the email add. was out there. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40824591)

It wasn't actually a tribute but that is the popular opinion.

Re:the email add. was out there. (3, Funny)

biodata (1981610) | about 2 years ago | (#40826129)

What's even worse is they went to Ryan Seacrest

Re:the email add. was out there. (5, Informative)

Blue Stone (582566) | about 2 years ago | (#40823789)

first.last@nbcuni.com

That's the template used by NBC for their CORPORATE emails. Replace "first.last" with the name of any exec and that's the amazingly private super-secret personal details the journalist had his account killed for.

The NBC executive was called Gary Zenkel.

This post would be a violation of Twitters TOS!

Re:the email add. was out there. (5, Informative)

MickyTheIdiot (1032226) | about 2 years ago | (#40823817)

welcome to the Streisand effect!

I bet their exchange server is choking as we speak. There's little doubt it's exchange, either...

Re:the email add. was out there. (1)

Inda (580031) | about 2 years ago | (#40826453)

gary.zenkel@nbcuni.com [mailto] is only mentioned 5,300 times on the internet, according to Google.

Re:the email add. was out there. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40823897)

This post would be a violation of Twitters TOS!

Use less letters then!

Re:the email add. was out there. (0)

Theaetetus (590071) | about 2 years ago | (#40823993)

first.last@nbcuni.com

That's the template used by NBC for their CORPORATE emails. Replace "first.last" with the name of any exec and that's the amazingly private super-secret personal details the journalist had his account killed for.

But, the email wasn't posted publicly anywhere by NBC. Although one could easily figure it out, that doesn't suddenly make it public. For example, phone numbers all have the template nnn-nnnn, and due to common exchanges, they can be easily narrowed down to a few thousand numbers and brute forced to find anyone within a geographic area. Does that mean that they are all public, regardless of unlisted status?

The question isn't the difficulty of determining the email, but whether the email owner chose to publish it or not. Since they didn't, then Twitter did the right thing here.

Re:the email add. was out there. (4, Insightful)

MickyTheIdiot (1032226) | about 2 years ago | (#40824083)

Again.. this ignores the fact that no one can find this rule in the TOS.

Re:the email add. was out there. (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40824889)

Again.. this ignores the fact that no one can find this rule in the TOS.

I am sure it is in the new TOS as of right now. Pray that Twitter don't alter the TOS any further.

Re:the email add. was out there. (1)

Jade_Wayfarer (1741180) | about 2 years ago | (#40826455)

Again.. this ignores the fact that no one can find this rule in the TOS.

I am sure it is in the new TOS as of right now. Pray that Twitter don't alter the TOS any further.

Out of mod points, pity.

Re:the email add. was out there. (1)

History's Coming To (1059484) | about 2 years ago | (#40824257)

You'd need to look at the policy documents for the IT department. If they maintain a consistent email name system to "facilitate corporate-customer contact" or some such, then it's fair game. If, on the other hand, they treat email addresses as secrets on the same level as employee's home phone numbers, then it's "hacking", albeit of the most fundamental type.

Re:the email add. was out there. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40824819)

The difference is that your name isn't 555-1234.

Re:the email add. was out there. (1)

stephanruby (542433) | about 2 years ago | (#40825429)

But, the email wasn't posted publicly anywhere by NBC.

Here is the rule in question (I found it in the Twitter Rules [twitter.com] , which you also agree to when you also agree to their Terms of Services)

Privacy: You may not publish or post other people's private and confidential information, such as credit card numbers, street address or Social Security/National Identity numbers, without their express authorization and permission.

Already, these rules have been distorted because in my mind at least, "private and confidential" is something that implies a much stronger sense of privacy than the term "non-public". For instance, could you even call the corporate email address on this NBC business card [google.com] private and confidential? No, right?

And by the way, I did find the part where Twitter does mention the "non-public" [twitter.com] thing, but that's buried in an index of 40 different articles, two levels away from the "Twitter rules > Reporting Violations" subheading (which is not even inside the Twitter rules [twitter.com] ).

And even if it was in the Twitter Rules (which it isn't), it isn't reasonable for a user to read the Terms of Services + the Twitter Rules, and expect them to click on the link to find out how to do "Reporting Violations" -- when they have no such need. In other words, the Twitter legalese is a huge bloody mess that has grown too much over the years. Someone really needs to clean it up.

The question isn't the difficulty of determining the email, but whether the email owner chose to publish it or not. Since they didn't, then Twitter did the right thing here.

That being said, even if for some weird reason, you did consider these "Reporting Violations" guidelines, that the user didn't even agree to, to be applicable. Then your assumption would still be completely wrong about its underlying meaning in this case.

"Keep in mind that although you may consider certain information to be private, not all postings of such information may be a violation of this policy. If information was previously posted or displayed elsewhere on the Internet prior to being put on Twitter, it is not a violation of this policy. "
source [twitter.com] [emphasis in bold is mine]

Clearly in this case, Twitter even violated its own policy (whether it did it knowingly, or unknowingly). Now I doubt there will be any legal repercussion because of this. It's not like the journalist was even a paying customer of Twitter (at least, I don't think that he was). But this is clearly a bad Public Relations move for Twitter, and it's one that is inconsistent with the self-image Twitter had of itself of being a champion of freedom. So hopefully, someone at the top of Twitter will reverse this decision quickly and issue a statement that they won't let this kind of thing happen again.

Re:the email add. was out there. (1)

Hal_Porter (817932) | about 2 years ago | (#40824803)

Hay guyz. Blue Stone's work phone number is 555-XXXX. His boss's work phone number is 555-XXXX. Also his home phone number is 555-XXXX and his address is XXXX.

Wouldn't it be a shame if everyone tried to call/visit him/his boss/his family to complain about him?

Fuck YOU (2)

SmallFurryCreature (593017) | about 2 years ago | (#40825735)

How dare you post my work email address?

Signed,

F. Last

Re:the email add. was out there. (2)

mjwx (966435) | about 2 years ago | (#40825843)

first.last@nbcuni.com

That's the template used by NBC for their CORPORATE emails. Replace "first.last" with the name of any exec and that's the amazingly private super-secret personal details the journalist had his account killed for.

The NBC executive was called Gary Zenkel.

This post would be a violation of Twitters TOS!

The problem with this is that Gary.Zenkel@nbcuni.com goes to his personal assistant(s). A direct email would be something like GZ1324@nbcuni.com. Seeing as it would appear as "Gary Zenkel" to people who have him in their address book (read: anyone who is permitted to mail him directly). Either that or his email address is configured not to accept mail from external sources. This is a basic self preservation measure for high ranking execs who are high priority targets to spammers, scammers and hawkers.

Retweets? (1)

Hatta (162192) | about 2 years ago | (#40827211)

So, how many people have retweeted the tweet that got this guys account banned? How many of them have been banned?

Re:the email add. was out there. (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40823815)

that's the debate if you're wondering.
if it wasn't public, how did he have it? personal relation? but no need for that since it was published on a blog.
and it's an email address for a fucking nbc exec, not for some secret agent...

and why it's a story is that there's moneyflow between olympics, nbc and twitter due to them doing big co-operation around the games.

and why nbc sucks is that they edited the opening ceremony and showed it time delayed(the reasoning is that americans are too stupid for the un-edited version, basically).

Personally I think it doesn't matter what type of address it is, we all know that this type of activity os just inciting harassment. Corporations have channels for feedback and you can always continue to rant online, but targeting a single person directly is imo not cool.

Re:the email add. was out there. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40823835)

this view about americans being too stoopid is correct. Just look at how they have let thier freedom slip into a police state. They have the military guarding disneyland right now, becuase your cops like to shoot at women and children, and let out the dogs to maul them. This rightly upsets the few that are awake while the rest of you gulp on supersized cokes and stuff greasy fries into your fat mouths. Yes you are all idiots, just look at your politicians - Obama kills thousands and gets a peace prize while people are appauled at a masked gunman killing only a few.

ps. who takes thier 6 year old daughter to a midnight screening of a Adult movie?? Guess they found out the hard way that is bad parenting.

Re:the email add. was out there. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40825155)

They have the military guarding disneyland right now, becuase your cops like to shoot at women and children, and let out the dogs to maul them.

Disneyland is not being protected by the military and no women or children were shot at by police officers in Anaheim.

It's generally not a good idea to call other people idiots if you're not informed on the topics you, for some reason, have an opinion on.

Re:the email add. was out there. (5, Insightful)

fiannaFailMan (702447) | about 2 years ago | (#40823957)

and why nbc sucks is that they edited the opening ceremony and showed it time delayed(the reasoning is that americans are too stupid for the un-edited version, basically).

It wasn't just that. It was the incessant inane commentary when they should have shut their traps and let the image do the talking. It was cutting out some of the best parts. It was spoiling the carefully crafted continuity with a constant bombardment of commercials. It was not knowing/giving a shit who Tim Berners Lee was and leaving it to the audience to google him; how ironic is that?

All of the people griping about how "bad" the opening ceremony was have two things in common: 1 they're American, and 2 They watched it on NBC.

I watched it on the BBC's feed and was blown away by it. I was a bit shocked when I started seeing comment threads from yanks complaining about it being "boring", I was wondering if they'd watched the same show as me.

Re:the email add. was out there. (0)

bob zee (701656) | about 2 years ago | (#40824043)

i watched on the BBC's feed and it was still shit. the olympics opening ceremonies would have been far better and far more entertaining if the blokes from top gear had produced it. danny boyle? come on.

Re:the email add. was out there. (1)

fiannaFailMan (702447) | about 2 years ago | (#40824223)

It wasn't shit. It was the greatest thing since the outside toilet. So there.

Re:the email add. was out there. (1)

bob zee (701656) | about 2 years ago | (#40824841)

ok, i was a little too exuberant with my use of the word, 'shit'. you are right. it wasn't shit, but it was weird. a little too weird, i think.

Re:the email add. was out there. (1)

Inda (580031) | about 2 years ago | (#40826441)

You didn't "get it", and this was true for a lot of people outside the UK. We understand.

Substitute "weird" for "quaint" and you'll begin your journey to "getting it"

Re:the email add. was out there. (1)

artor3 (1344997) | about 2 years ago | (#40824801)

All of the people griping about how "bad" the opening ceremony was have two things in common: 1 they're American, and 2 They watched it on NBC.

It started great, but that entire sequence with the cell phones was absolutely terrible. Since it came towards the end, I think it colored people's views and led them to forget some of the high points.

And NBC did not leave it to the audience to google Tim Berners Lee. They definitely mentioned him as the inventor of the web. I remember it distinctly, because I was waiting for them to screw up and claim he invented the internet. They never made that mistake, but it appears that Mr. Boyle did, since he had his lovestruck teens thanking him for their cell phones.

Re:the email add. was out there. (2)

FireFury03 (653718) | about 2 years ago | (#40826169)

I remember it distinctly, because I was waiting for them to screw up and claim he invented the internet. They never made that mistake, but it appears that Mr. Boyle did, since he had his lovestruck teens thanking him for their cell phones.

Cell phones do the web these days...

sequence with the cell phones (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40830897)

It also made no sense. The girl lost her phone, the boy found it, and called her to say "I found your phone." When means...HE had her phone. So how did she answer?

Re:the email add. was out there. (1)

SonnyDog09 (1500475) | about 2 years ago | (#40826833)

All of the people griping about how "bad" the opening ceremony was have two things in common: 1 they're American, and 2 They watched it on NBC.

1. I am an American. 2. I never watch the opening ceremonies of the Olympics. I think they are all lame and pathetic. Yes, I griped. But I did not watch it on NBC. Sorry to disappoint you.

i missed it, and BBC iplayer says: not in the USA (1)

circletimessquare (444983) | about 2 years ago | (#40826899)

so i can't watch the opening ceremony: nbc doesn't offer it

fuck this ridiculous fucking system of intellectual property control

you just want to smash it to pieces and defy it, on the principal of the thing: if the consumer wants to watch something, and the artist wants you to watch it, and infrastructure exists for you to do so (the Internet), the useless rent-seeking parasites who don't let you watch it are destroying culture and cultural appreciation in the name of a buck, and adding nothing back to the equation

so they must be defied and destroyed

Re:the email add. was out there. (1)

Hatta (162192) | about 2 years ago | (#40827177)

It wasn't boring. It was the goofiest shit I've seen in my life, but it wasn't boring.

Re:the email add. was out there. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40829405)

True that: much akin to an interstate pile-up of clown cars. Painful to watch, but all the pretty colors!!!

Re:the email add. was out there. (1)

Ol Olsoc (1175323) | about 2 years ago | (#40824295)

and why nbc sucks is that they edited the opening ceremony and showed it time delayed(the reasoning is that americans are too stupid for the un-edited version, basically).

Perhaps they know their audience? You know, the people who would actually watch the opening ceremony?

You know, I don't like you. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40824739)

(the reasoning is that americans are too stupid for the un-edited version, basically).

Fuck you. I didn't have any say in this decision, so don't you dare lump me into that pile.

Re:You know, I don't like you. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40825383)

I'll try to explain using simple words so that your tiny American brain can comprehend. He said NBC edited the ceremony because (he thinks) the people at NBC, knowing its public, thought Americans in general would be too stupid to understand the opening ceremony otherwise. Personally, I doubt they'd make the opening so clever that idiots wouldn't understand it (that'd be a stupid decision), but I didn't watch it so I can't know if it needed to be dumbed down.

Re:the email add. was out there. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40827279)

> the reasoning is that americans are too stupid for the un-edited version, basically

Fuck you very much. -America

In Before Free Speech (1)

Zaelath (2588189) | about 2 years ago | (#40823629)

Enforcing this rule early enough to matter a damn would require a bot...

Re:In Before Free Speech (1)

zlives (2009072) | about 2 years ago | (#40823711)

check with facebook, they might be able to help with that ;)

Twitter had no choice (3, Informative)

l0ungeb0y (442022) | about 2 years ago | (#40823685)

It was a lot simpler to just wipe out the user's account than merely remove the offending Tweet. Because by removing the Tweet, Twitter would themselves have been in violation of their own privacy policies by having tampered with the User's Account and would be enacting censorship -- which is bad. And after all, User Accounts and the data they contain are virtual and have no actual value. Frankly, I wonder why people still use crap like private email and other open messaging services when we have all these wonderful Monolithic Services like Twitter and Facebook to provide all our communication needs.

Re:Twitter had no choice (3, Informative)

cpu6502 (1960974) | about 2 years ago | (#40823891)

Yeah it did have a choice. Since this is NOT a "'non-public email address" but in fact posted on a public NBC website, twitter's rule was violated. The stupid corporate behemoth can't even follow its own rule. It has all the brains of a tree, or rock, or building (i.e. none).

Re:Twitter had no choice (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40824761)

We wouldn't want Twitter committing censorship like tweaking the trends - oh wail, twitter thinks that form of censorship is okay.

FSCK the olympics (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40823713)

The Olympics take advantage of tax payers by building arenas that never pay off, they don't compensate athletes, the stars of their show, for their hard work and all the while, the IOC gets billions from ads and tv deals.

The athletes work for no pay, the city builds the stadiums and provides staff and security so what do the IOC spend their $$$ on???

Its a huge scam, screw them!

Re:FSCK the olympics (2)

MindlessAutomata (1282944) | about 2 years ago | (#40823763)

It really is. There's a LOT of money and corruption behind the Olympics.

Re:FSCK the olympics (4, Insightful)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | about 2 years ago | (#40823793)

The Olympics take advantage of tax payers by building arenas that never pay off, they don't compensate athletes, the stars of their show, for their hard work and all the while, the IOC gets billions from ads and tv deals.

The athletes work for no pay, the city builds the stadiums and provides staff and security so what do the IOC spend their $$$ on???

Its a huge scam, screw them!

It's worse than that, I'm afraid.

Like a mythological vampire, the Olympics can only come inside if invited(in fact, given the competition each round, you pretty much have to grovel at the IOC's feet to get one). So, if your city finds itself in the unfortunate position of hosting an Olympic event, you are witnessing the end-stage political rot where whoever is in charge has (in the face of considerable competition) to knowingly invite a hugely expensive debacle to town in order to drum up some PR and have an excuse to farm out a bunch of sweetheart contracts on top of whatever part of the city doesn't meet their approval.

If the Olympics were some sort of outside force, imposed by IOC occupation troopers, it would actually be less pernicious. Alas, it is a parasitic organism that shows up to produce the especially grotesque symptoms of uncontrolled unaccountability in local governance, rather like all those exotic cancers and fungal infections that show up in immunocompromised patients.

This isn't to say that burning down the IOC would be a bad thing, of course, plenty of blame to go around; but your only real solution involves wheeling in the guillotine at the municipal level...

Re:FSCK the olympics (1)

techno-vampire (666512) | about 2 years ago | (#40823981)

given the competition each round, you pretty much have to grovel at the IOC's feet to get one

Not always. Los Angeles has hosted the Olympics twice, in '32 and '84. Both times they were the only city offering to host them and both games were profitable for the city. Strange, but true.

Re:FSCK the olympics (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40824377)

The Olympics take advantage of tax payers by building arenas that never pay off, they don't compensate athletes, the stars of their show, for their hard work and all the while, the IOC gets billions from ads and tv deals.

The athletes work for no pay, the city builds the stadiums and provides staff and security so what do the IOC spend their $$$ on???

Its a huge scam, screw them!

It's worse than that, I'm afraid.

Like a mythological vampire, the Olympics can only come inside if invited(in fact, given the competition each round, you pretty much have to grovel at the IOC's feet to get one). So, if your city finds itself in the unfortunate position of hosting an Olympic event, you are witnessing the end-stage political rot where whoever is in charge has (in the face of considerable competition) to knowingly invite a hugely expensive debacle to town in order to drum up some PR and have an excuse to farm out a bunch of sweetheart contracts on top of whatever part of the city doesn't meet their approval.

If the Olympics were some sort of outside force, imposed by IOC occupation troopers, it would actually be less pernicious. Alas, it is a parasitic organism that shows up to produce the especially grotesque symptoms of uncontrolled unaccountability in local governance, rather like all those exotic cancers and fungal infections that show up in immunocompromised patients.

This isn't to say that burning down the IOC would be a bad thing, of course, plenty of blame to go around; but your only real solution involves wheeling in the guillotine at the municipal level...

Heh. Yet another Obama failure.

Dude can't even grovel/bribe the IOC properly.

Re:FSCK the olympics (1)

reub2000 (705806) | about 2 years ago | (#40824467)

You call it a failure. I call it a success. Let Rio deal with the mess that the Olympics brings.

Re:FSCK the olympics (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40824443)

Grovel - as I recall from Olympics past, grovelling wasn't nearly enough.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_Winter_Olympic_bid_scandal
"Excessive hospitality" worked best 10 years ago, but I'm sure it's much better now.

Re:FSCK the olympics (2)

AmiMoJo (196126) | about 2 years ago | (#40826291)

I question the assumption that the Olympics are always bad for the host city. Some have made a good profit off them and some have had a worthwhile and long lasting legacy. Tokyo is a good example. They still use the buildings and the infrastructure upgrades, particularly the push the put up more English language signage and make the city more tourist friendly.

Just because some people don't get it right doesn't mean you can't. It is far too early to tell how London will do, although you seem to be pretty certain about it somehow.

Re:FSCK the olympics (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40826565)

There are certainly some things the London Olympics has done correctly, in terms of a long term legacy.

1) Building the park within the city means that it will continue to be very accessible. Parks built outside cities are prone to becoming white elephants.
2) Regeneration of an industrial part of East London, creation of parks, improvements in travel. These will continue to benefit that part of London for quite some time. However whilst the park is regenerated, the surrounding areas are still quite deprived. Maybe the benefits will ripple out over time, too early to say now.

Anything involving the sponsors has been a great big clusterfuck. And G4S of course...

Re:FSCK the olympics (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40823871)

The Olympics is using ZFS, no need for fsck.

Re:FSCK the olympics (1)

jonwil (467024) | about 2 years ago | (#40825373)

I can't find a copy online anywhere but if you have access to ABC Australia iView (the digital catchup service the ABC runs) go watch the first episode of "Gruen Sweat" where they expose the Olympics for what it REALLY is. The Olympics is no longer a sporting contest, the sport has taken a back seat to the marketing and sponsorship.

Incidentally... (5, Interesting)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | about 2 years ago | (#40823735)

It is probably worth mentioning that Twitter was/is NBC's 'partner' for coverage of the Olympics... That's sort of a salient detail.

No doubt he was censored bcuz he embarrassed NBC (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40823743)

Been following his tweets since the beginning and this much is clear. NBC needed 2 shut him up and shut him up quick because his complaints were starting 2 get traction. For example, this morning I got poo all over my asscheeks because the poo started 2 come out of the hole b4 I had sat down on the throne. Embarrassing 4 sure. Tweet that.

bad summary (3, Insightful)

MickyTheIdiot (1032226) | about 2 years ago | (#40823771)

It's not even clear if posting the email is against their TOS even if it is private... and it isn't private. Their email naming scheme is clear and the full address has been published before.

This is corporate asshattery.... there isn't any doubt about it to anyone but the poster. NBC and Twitter are partners and they muzzled a critic for a trumped up infraction.

There hasn't been discussion about it here, but the whole NBC coverage is an idiotic, jingoistic, and technical mess. Read #nbcfail on twitter yourself (I know... slashdotters are too cool for twitter) and you'll see it yourself.

Re:bad summary (1, Insightful)

Theaetetus (590071) | about 2 years ago | (#40824027)

It's not even clear if posting the email is against their TOS even if it is private... and it isn't private. Their email naming scheme is clear and the full address has been published before.

"Private" doesn't mean "uncrackable". NBC apparently hadn't published it before, so regardless of how simplistic their email naming scheme, the email was still private.

This is corporate asshattery.... there isn't any doubt about it to anyone but the poster. NBC and Twitter are partners and they muzzled a critic for a trumped up infraction.

A conspiracy theory like that only makes sense if NBC and Twitter are muzzling other critics... But wait:

Read #nbcfail on twitter yourself

Apparently, not only are they not muzzling critics, said criticism is indexed and easily searchable.

We can argue about the Streisand effect and the wisdom of the account suspension all we want, but to claim that Twitter is engaging in censorship over a viewpoint seems to be contradicted by the wide number of posts they're hosting with that same viewpoint.

Re:bad summary (1)

MickyTheIdiot (1032226) | about 2 years ago | (#40824063)

You apparently don't understand the weight given to so "journalist" compared to a regular slob like myself. There is a reason why HE got squelched and someone like me didn't. To them one of him is equal to 10,000 of me, give or take.

Everyone is entitled to your opinion, but I am very tired of people calling something like this a "conspiracy theory." It isn't conspiracy... it was done by one person (or corporation) out in the open. You're using it a slur and as a way to try to make me look bad and nothing more.

Re:bad summary (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40825031)

So... Did Spike Lee get suspended for posting (what he thought) was George Zimmerman's home address?

Yeah-- that's what I thought.

Freedom of speech belongs to the press owners (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40823873)

And this is why the First Amendment is so important to America: it gives a great illusion of freedom to keep people in check.

Re:Freedom of speech belongs to the press owners (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40827119)

Free speech is about being able to voice your opinions and criticisms for the sake of public interest, namely against the government. It's not the right to publish people's private information, especially not to provide private contact information while encouraging people to complain through it en masse. You're probably one of those people that thinks bomb threats and trolling facebook funeral/memorial pages is all protected by free speech too.

Guy Adams Fail. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40823877)

As much as I hate NBC's coverage. I'm not sure how much lip I would take from a guy who is upset that NBC: admitted that they "haven't heard" of Tim Berners-Lee, the Briton who created the internet. (here [independent.co.uk] ); Doesn't he know that the internet already has an inventor: Al Gore.

Re:Guy Adams Fail. (2)

aztracker1 (702135) | about 2 years ago | (#40824277)

I thought he created the World Wide Web... not the underlying internet.

Wow... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40824051)

They're sucking all the right dicks and bending over for the right people.

Twitter sure wants someone to buy them. Before the fad dies.

The first rule of Tweet Club. (2)

theodp (442580) | about 2 years ago | (#40824081)

You do not talk about the corporate e-mail addresses of those who partner with Tweet Club.

Re:The first rule of Tweet Club. (1)

rossdee (243626) | about 2 years ago | (#40824205)

So is there a list? (Of people/corporations we are not supposed to tweet about? Of course this list would have to be posted somewhere besides twitter - Wikileaks sounds like the appropriate place)

Looking for some real news (2, Interesting)

chicago_scott (458445) | about 2 years ago | (#40824543)

I just read this story on CNN.com and got pretty discouraged. So, I came to Slashdot to read something interesting and see that this is on the main page.

Time to turn off the computer and turn on the stereo.

In other "news" (0)

Bodhammer (559311) | about 2 years ago | (#40824673)

In other "news", NBC filed for bankruptcy due to poor ratings, esp. at MSNBC where left-wing, ideological fanatics turned a formerly, well respected, news origination into the propaganda arm of the increasingly socialist, progressive wing of the Democratic party with low ratings that reflect how out of touch that philosophy had become in mainstream USA.
Film at 11...

Re:In other "news" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40830531)

It's funny how to far-right nuts like you, civilized, centrist people are left-wing.

Not so "private" (1)

Soldarith (1274714) | about 2 years ago | (#40824723)

If it is written on a business card, it isn't "private"...

It is just another example of how corporations are ruling every aspect of our lives and the rights of the individual are dwindling...

You'd think people would learn.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40824847)

Didn't they make an example of Spike Lee for tweeting the wrong address of that Zimmerman guy?

Re:You'd think people would learn.. (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40824911)

The courts should have made an example of Spike Lee. What he did was reckless. It could have lead to human deaths. No different from a bomb threat. Spike Lee should have cooled his heels in jail for a few months.

Actually, NBC did us a favor (1)

Skapare (16644) | about 2 years ago | (#40824963)

... by preventing us from having to watch that crappy performance twice.

Oh wait. My TV wasn't even on.

Re:Actually, NBC did us a favor (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40826581)

Haha, another 'merkin who doesn't understand the ceremony.

Re:Actually, NBC did us a favor (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40827425)

Another Eurocunt snob who thinks that anyone who doesn't like their tea and or enjoy the same "entertainment" as they do is a pleb.

So you can call for someone's murder and tweet... (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40825491)

a home address that you want the mobs to make their way toward, like Spike Lee and Roseanne Barr both did in the Zimmerman case. And there is zero action on Twitter's part. But OMG, tweet some corporate shmuck's business E-mail address and Twitter gives you the boot? What kind of bullshit is that?

VPN (1)

theurge14 (820596) | about 2 years ago | (#40825709)

Set up a VPN to the UK, use the BBC iPlayer to bypass NBC.

For those less technically inclined (yes even on Slashdot), go over to tunnelbear.com and install. Follow directions, visit BBC iPlayer site again. Bypass NBC.

Reaffirmation (1)

VernorVinge (1420843) | about 2 years ago | (#40825925)

This simply reaffirms why I cancelled my Twitter account years ago. Still struggling to turn off Facebook, but it's more of a news service/photo album than anything else these days.

Isn't this a generic problem? (1)

cheros (223479) | about 2 years ago | (#40826351)

I get this sense that more and more of public communication takes places through channels that can arbitrarily impose their rules, mood or insanity on this communication through what amounts to uncontrolled censorship.

Of course, you agree to that when you decide to participate (usually also to the ritual slaughtering of your first born when you properly read the T&Cs) but at a certain volume you start wondering if you're not dealing with something that massively impacts the common good without any control on their behaviour whatsoever.

Facebook is in this respect also a classic - the latest Data Protection saga [europe-v-facebook.org] shows clearly that it does not want to even create the impression it is bound to any laws, and sadly the regulator in question is helping..

Yet.. Spike Lee still has an account (2)

Fraktyl (673488) | about 2 years ago | (#40826835)

He posted the address, completely wrong I might add, of Zimmerman. Completely wrong people, and that caused them to receive death threats, and they had to move out of their house for a bit.

Some guy posts an email address that is easy to find and suddenly there is hell to pay. The irony of all this is that Gary Zenkel's email address is being reported by international news agencies now. So much for keeping it private.

Figuring out Zenkel's address is no brain-teaser (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40828803)

"It took me all of 30 seconds to find this page that lists all kinds of email addresses for various NBC Sports employees right on the Web site of NBC Sports. Figuring out Zenkel's address is no brain-teaser." link [networkworld.com]

Would it be gary.zenkel@nbcuni.com ?

But! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40829275)

But they have no problem sharing yours or mine with other people.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...