Martin Moore Blog: An unnecessary unmasking that does more than just damage The Times’ reputation
Sunday, 21 June 2009, 17:10
"By taking the decision to expose Night Jack The Times has almost certainly deprived us of voices that would otherwise have spoken out. It will probably have made whistleblowers and anonymous sources think twice before releasing information. It has, in other words, done a good job of suppressing free speech and freedom of expression."
Shane Richmond: Naming Nightjack: The Times was right legally but wrong morally
Friday, 19 June 2009, 10:54
Shane Richmond: "I can see the sense in both The Times's argument and Mr Justice Eady's. The legal case is clear but I'm less comfortable with the moral case. Nightjack was trying to shed light on his work and bring the public a view of policing that could only be done anonymously. Shouldn't newspapers be protecting people like him? Certainly, The Times would have protected him had he been their source. But being out on his own meant that he was fair game."
Girl with a one-track mind: Privacy
Friday, 19 June 2009, 10:52
"With the current situation in Iran, we are reminded of the need for online anonymity for those people who are, quite literally, risking their lives to get their messages out, so this landmark ruling in the British courts is extremely worrying and a threat to all of our rights to privacy."
PC Bloggs: The Real Blows in Life
Friday, 19 June 2009, 10:51
Another blogging cop writes: "I do … think it is ironic that police blogger Nightjack's identity has been revealed by the ruling of a judge who on the same day ruled that the Beckhams' old nanny must make a formal apology for breaching their confidence some years ago. Of course, the Beckhams aren't bloggers, just international celebrities whose lives are generally available for public consumption. So clearly they require more protection than an erstwhile Lancashire detective constable who donates his off-duty earnings to charity."
One Man and His Blog: The Times vrs NightJack: Destroying Journalists’ Reputation
Friday, 19 June 2009, 10:47
Adam Tinworth: "I think that it's absolutely despicable that a journalistic operation did this. The 'public interest' figleaf they're using blows away the second you consider that they've made it easier for people to connect the blog posts with real cases, not harder."
