Press freedom and INM

20Cent

INM Irelands biggest media company have had their network accessed by third parties. The Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement (ODCE) have filed an affidavit alleging that data from the INM network was "interrogated". 19 people including barristers and journalists are listed as being the focus of this search.



Some shady stuff going on here. The company that was given the data is owned by <redacted>.

Vladimir Poontang

Couldn't have happened to a nicer bunch of people

Zebra3

Part owned by a criminal.

Boo hoo.

Odhinn

20Cent wrote: »

INM Irelands biggest media company have had their network accessed by third parties. The Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement (ODCE) have filed an affidavit alleging that data from the INM network was "interrogated". 19 people including barristers and journalists are listed as being the focus of this search.



Some shady stuff going on here. The company that was given the data is owned by <redacted>.

Indeed. <Redacted> seems to have been using it as a resource in a private vendetta. Given the deference shown to his honoured personage, and his ownership of the Cauldron Of Plenty (legal fees edition), he'll probably walk.

20Cent

Odhinn wrote: »

Indeed. <Redacted> seems to have been using it as a resource in a private vendetta. Given the deference shown to his honoured personage, and his ownership of the Cauldron Of Plenty (legal fees edition), he'll probably walk.

Includes two senior counsel of the Moriarty tribunal. Should be a massive story haven't listened to rte yet today. Newstalk are all over it I'm sure.

touts

20Cent wrote: »

Includes two senior counsel of the Moriarty tribunal. Should be a massive story haven't listened to rte yet today. Newstalk are all over it I'm sure.

That they seemed to be after journalists sources was bad enough but it is this Moriarty aspect that is especially worrying. Redacted has in the past been referred to as an Oligarch but there is an increasing Russian flavour to this particular oligarchy. There seems to be very genuine fear of him among the journalist and legal professions and the least said about his relationship with the political profession the better.

I'd say the books that will be written in a few decades once he has shuffled off to face that big tribunal in the sky will be fascinating and eye-opening. Until then I suspect those in the know will keep their heads down and pray he doesn't come for them.

Odhinn

Be good if Sam Smith got a few bob out of <Redacted>.

http://www.broadsheet.ie/2018/04/03/i-heard-nothing-whatsoever-from-inm/

Hector Bellend

What exactly is Data interrogation?

touts

Hector Bellend wrote: »

What exactly is Data interrogation?

Searching emails and files for certain key phrases. Like the name of a certain powerful individual, or certain businesses or certain politicians. Then seeing who in his organisation might be giving information to nare-do-wells like journalists or tribunal lawyers. Purely for taking them off the old Christmas list of course.

Deise Vu

Hector Bellend wrote: »

What exactly is Data interrogation?

Just a fancy word for searching through mounds of information. Say for example you were an extremely sensitive individual whose name came up at a Tribunal in an unflattering manner which you hotly deny. If your paranoia stretches to not trusting people working in organisations you control you could pay someone to, for example, 'interrogate' all the electronic correspondence in said organisations and, using a list of 'triggers' such as named individuals, you could quickly sift through millions of emails to see if there are any connections via email or other correspondence which might show evidence of disloyalty or, possibly in a newspaper situation for example, uncover evidence of moles or sources that would normally be protected by journalistic privilege.

That didn't happen in this case of course. We know from Leslie Buckley that it was merely a way of seeing could the INM get out of a contract for legal services where the contract had been mislaid. Because moving the entire back up system offshore for interrogation and paying £60K for the service via an Isle of Man company would be the obvious way to locate this contract rather than, say, asking the legal adviser for a copy of the contract.

Assetbacked

IT reporting;

“So is this about O’Brien?

He hasn’t commented yet. But according to reports in the Independent that have not been denied, it was a company belonging to O’Brien that paid the bill arising from the alleged data breach. This company, Blaydon Ltd, is registered in the Isle of Man and it is not possible from public filings to tell who owns it.”

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/q-a-what-is-going-on-in-the-inm-controversy-1.3449609?mode=amp

See attached screenshot from another IT article with more info on Blaydon Limited which is controlled by DO’B (assisted by William Fry solicitors).

The Blaydon Company appears to be utilized by DO’B for financial transactions and paid for the data breach. Given the strong links with the data use by 3rd parties to DO’B, this could be a very big story.

The question is what exactly he used the data for. This is potentially a huge scandal; particularly as the signs are pointing to DO’B himself being the reason the “data breach” occurred.

Ursus Horribilis

I'd love for the truth to come out fully about this. It won't though, will it?

Deise Vu

Ursus Horribilis wrote: »

I'd love for the truth to come out fully about this. It won't though, will it?

This is a massive story getting hardly any coverage by mainstream press for obvious and ominous reasons. A man against whom adverse findings were made a a Tribunal is using the entire resources of the largest circulation newspaper in the country to track Barristers who appeared at said Tribunal and trawling Journalist's email correspondence for God knows what purpose.

If nothing else comes of it I hope someone in the Govt grows a pair and accepts the obvious conclusion that too much media power in the hands of one individual is a highly dangerous thing and does something about it.

Yet this thread has had 500 views versus 333K for Al Porter? The human race is fúcked.

WHIP IT!

Deise Vu wrote: »

Ursus Horribilis wrote: »

I'd love for the truth to come out fully about this. It won't though, will it?

This is a massive story getting hardly any coverage by mainstream press for obvious and ominous reasons. A man against whom adverse findings were made a a Tribunal is using the entire resources of the largest circulation newspaper in the country to track Barristers who appeared at said Tribunal and trawling Journalist's email correspondence for God knows what purpose.

If nothing else comes of it I hope someone in the Govt grows a pair and accepts the obvious conclusion that too much media power in the hands of one individual is a highly dangerous thing and does something about it.

Yet this thread has had 500 views versus 333K for Al Porter? The human race is fúcked.

I completely agree with your final paragraph but the claim you make in your opening par is just not true. The media is all over this - it's a great story!

Also just wanna thank Deise Vu for his brilliant post summing the whole thing up perfectly ðŸ‘

Odhinn

Just as a warning - there is the very real danger that this incident will add credence to the notion of Brendan O'Connor as a commentator and journalist, so lets be careful now.

twinytwo

Deise Vu wrote: »

This is a massive story getting hardly any coverage by mainstream press for obvious and ominous reasons. A man against whom adverse findings were made a a Tribunal is using the entire resources of the largest circulation newspaper in the country to track Barristers who appeared at said Tribunal and trawling Journalist's email correspondence for God knows what purpose.

If nothing else comes of it I hope someone in the Govt grows a pair and accepts the obvious conclusion that too much media power in the hands of one individual is a highly dangerous thing and does something about it.

Yet this thread has had 500 views versus 333K for Al Porter? The human race is fúcked.

Why would the gov care, they recently paid journalists to only write positive articles about the Ireland 2040 plan. How can you trust media that is paid to paint a certain picture?

Journalism is too close to politics and the elite classes in this country.

Deise Vu

twinytwo wrote: »

Why would the gov care, they recently paid journalists to only write positive articles about the Ireland 2040 plan. How can you trust media that is paid to paint a certain picture?

Journalism is too close to politics and the elite classes in this country.

It is disturbing that Newspapers would print paid for articles as 'opinion' and the Govt has rightly been called to task for it. It is an altogether more sinister story if one extremely rich individual can shape the news to his satisfaction and use newspaper's resources to carry out his own agenda.

We have seen what effect 'fake news', Fox News, Facebook and Data Analytics have had on massively important votes recently. It is vital for a working democracy that we have independent (no pun intended) investigative journalists who can carry out their work without worrying about getting a tap on their shoulder or their having their sources compromised. We also need those sources to have faith in their confidentiality if their information could threaten their careers.

McMurphy

Broadsheet had an article on it yesterday, just scanned a few of the online comments, with a few hoping Denis actually 'gets caught' this time.


Serious question though, what would actually happen to him if he is

Look at the siteserv controversy, that came in the wake of the Moriarty tribunal.

Odhinn

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

Broadsheet had an article on it yesterday, just scanned a few of the online comments, with a few hoping Denis actually 'gets caught' this time.


Serious question though, what would actually happen to him if he is:confused:

Look at the siteserv controversy, that came in the wake of the Moriarty tribunal.

He'd be buried in a coat of lawyers, three deep.

El Weirdo

Deise Vu wrote: »

Yet this thread has had 500 views versus 333K for Al Porter? The human race is fúcked.

To be fair, the Al Porter thread is nearly 6 months old.

Colonel Claptrap

Irish Times have been cautiously reporting this for months with a lot of ommitted details. You could tell their hand was tied behind their back, terrified of being sued.

The articles made little sense and it was difficult to understand the point they were making when reporting on the various court cases. At first i thought it was sloppy reporting. In hindsight, i now realise they were trying to get as much dirt out there, without actually saying anything concrete.

I bet they have a treasure trove of evidence they're just dying to release. I'd say a lot of former and current INM journalists are knocking on the door, looking for work.

Looking forward to the various books on this in years to come.

Assetbacked

Article in the IT today discussing aspects of the affidavit filed with the high court. https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/laywer-to-review-inm-board-row-switched-after-o-brien-intervened-1.3450732?mode=amp

At the time the board wanted to conduct a governance review arising from a dispute over the proposed sale to INM of Newstalk, a radio station owned by Mr O’Brien.

Board members had approved the appointment of Brian O’Moore SC but it was not proceeded with after the then chairman of INM, Leslie Buckley, who had consulted Mr O’Brien, intervened, according to the affidavit. It is also stated in the affidavit that the board was not told of Mr O’Brien’s preference that Mr O’Moore not be appointed.

Mr O’Brien’s involvement in a matter which directly concerned him is one of the issues raised by the Director of Corporate Enforcement, Ian Drennan, whose application for the appointment of inspectors to INM is to be heard in the High Court on Monday week. Mr O’Brien’s apparent role in vetoing the barrister is one of the matters Mr Drennan wants investigated by High Court inspectors.

Leslie Buckley acting as O’Brien’s puppet in his role, according to the above, and did not disclose consulting with DOB to the other board members.

Hurrache

Deise Vu wrote: »

This is a massive story getting hardly any coverage by mainstream press for obvious and ominous reasons.

Ah c'mon, it's been in all the media, even DOBs own radio stations regularly covering it in detail.

Call me Al

Hurrache wrote: »

Ah c'mon, it's been in all the media, even DOBs own radio stations regularly covering it in detail.

https://www.todayfm.com/News/Calls-For-Minister-For-Technology-After-INM-Data-Breech

This is the rather odd sum total of the coverage this morning on TodayFM's website News column.

I don't think they could have written a more brief and bizarre analysis and angle of a serious situation if they'd tried.

Deise Vu

Assetbacked wrote: »

Article in the IT today discussing aspects of the affidavit filed with the high court. https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/laywer-to-review-inm-board-row-switched-after-o-brien-intervened-1.3450732?mode=amp



Leslie Buckley acting as O’Brien’s puppet in her role, according to the above, and did not disclose consulting with DOB to the other board members.

Being pedantic and also with due deference to the apparent extreme touchiness of the people involved, it should be pointed out that Leslie Buckley is a male.

Hurrache

Call me Al wrote: »

https://www.todayfm.com/News/Calls-For-Minister-For-Technology-After-INM-Data-Breech

This is the rather odd sum total of the coverage this morning on TodayFM's website News column.

I don't think they could have written a more brief and bizarre analysis and angle of a serious situation if they'd tried.

Well I never go to radio stations websites for news, I actually listen to their current affairs shows if they have them. And they've been covering it a lot on the Last Word, yesterday evening included when they had quite a long piece about it (15 minutes), and I'm sure they covered it every other show this week too.

Gravelly

Deise Vu wrote: »

Being pedantic and also with due deference to the apparent extreme touchiness of the people involved, it should be pointed out that Leslie Buckley is a male.

Given how he appears to dance to his masters voice, only in the broadest sense of the word.

McMurphy

Call me Al wrote: »

https://www.todayfm.com/News/Calls-For-Minister-For-Technology-After-INM-Data-Breech

This is the rather odd sum total of the coverage this morning on TodayFM's website News column.

I don't think they could have written a more brief and bizarre analysis and angle of a serious situation if they'd tried.

Well that article really delved into the guts of the story and no mistake:cool:

CrankyHaus

I am totally confident that the Data Protection Commissioner will investigate this alleged data breach at INM with total impartiality and to the fullest extent.

Oh wait she's the keynote speaker at INM's conference on data protection next week :rolleyes:

garbo speaks

Deise Vu wrote: »

Yet this thread has had 500 views versus 333K for Al Porter? The human race is fúcked.

That's because this story is as dull as dishwater.

Ray Bloody Purchase

garbo speaks wrote: »

That's because this story is as dull as dishwater.

Not enough shiny things in this thread to keep your attention?

Colonel Claptrap

I'm struggling to understand the Declan Ganley link.

Ganley was critical of O'Brien's fraudulent winning of the mobile phone licence.

O'Brien accusses Ganley as being the secret client of the firm which compiled a dossier on O'Brien. He forced a court to make Ganley a co-defendent in a civil trial to discover the origin of the dossier. Ganley claims to know nothing about this.

Ganley has links to the O'Reilley family who previously controlled INM.

O'Moore (the original investigator appointed by INM board, later replaced by O'Brien) is retained by Ganley in on going litigation related to the mobile phone licence case.

Is this whole thing a revenge plot between the 2 men? Are they in competition with each directly?

Can anyone clarify any of this?

Also, is Robert Pitt a concerned bystander in all this or does he have links to Ganley/O'reilley family?

emo72

Is it illegal to have a dossier on an individual? Say perhaps Ganley doesn't like o Brien, and wants to beat him at business. Why would anyone consider that illegal?

Ray Bloody Purchase

emo72 wrote: »

Is it illegal to have a dossier on an individual? Say perhaps Ganley doesn't like o Brien, and wants to beat him at business. Why would anyone consider that illegal?

It's probably more about how you get the information which you put in your little file.

Deise Vu

Ray Bloody Purchase wrote: »

It's probably more about how you get the information which you put in your little file.

Sometimes though a USB key can magically land on your desk with all sorts of records from another company. It must be something to do with clean living and a clear conscience that good things keep happening to some people.

Gravelly

emo72 wrote: »

Is it illegal to have a dossier on an individual? Say perhaps Ganley doesn't like o Brien, and wants to beat him at business. Why would anyone consider that illegal?

Ray Bloody Purchase wrote: »

It's probably more about how you get the information which you put in your little file.

I'm a bit puzzled by this also - apparently the stuff on the infamous usb key was all in the public domain - it consisted of excerpts from newspaper articles, and a speech made in the Dáil Éireann if I remember correctly - I'm at a loss to understand how this could be litigious, no matter who gathered it together - is it only litigious if one has stupendous sums of money to make it so?

Deise Vu

Gravelly wrote: »

I'm a bit puzzled by this also - apparently the stuff on the infamous usb key was all in the public domain - it consisted of excerpts from newspaper articles, and a speech made in the Dáil Éireann if I remember correctly - I'm at a loss to understand how this could be litigious, no matter who gathered it together - is it only litigious if one has stupendous sums of money to make it so?

As far as I can recall the High Court agrees with you. The Judge also said none of the material had even been published and, if it had been published and was proven to be defamatory, then the plaintiff would have remedies under the libel laws.

I thought costs had even been awarded but I must have been mistaken because the case is still ongoing, and has now taken further twists with Declan Ganley added and with Colm Keaveney's contribution. Utterly bizarre stuff. It's like as if <redacted> just wants to tie up people he sees as opponents in endless legal wrangles that are as pointless as they are expensive to deter any negative mentions of him anywhere. But that would be too ridiculous for words wouldn't it?

Ray Bloody Purchase

Deise Vu wrote: »

As far as I can recall the High Court agrees with you. The Judge also said none of the material had even been published and, if it had been published and was proven to be defamatory, then the plaintiff would have remedies under the libel laws.

I thought costs had even been awarded but I must have been mistaken because the case is still ongoing, and has now taken further twists with Declan Ganley added and with Colm Keaveney's contribution. Utterly bizarre stuff. It's like as if <redacted> just wants to tie up people he sees as opponents in endless legal wrangles that are as pointless as they are expensive to deter any negative mentions of him anywhere. But that would be too ridiculous for words wouldn't it?

What was Keaveneys contribution?

Gravelly

Deise Vu wrote: »

As far as I can recall the High Court agrees with you. The Judge also said none of the material had even been published and, if it had been published and was proven to be defamatory, then the plaintiff would have remedies under the libel laws.

I thought costs had even been awarded but I must have been mistaken because the case is still ongoing, and has now taken further twists with Declan Ganley added and with Colm Keaveney's contribution. Utterly bizarre stuff. It's like as if <redacted> just wants to tie up people he sees as opponents in endless legal wrangles that are as pointless as they are expensive to deter any negative mentions of him anywhere. But that would be too ridiculous for words wouldn't it?

Indeed, I doubt <redacted> would dream of using his enormous wealth, wealth which he gained in a completely legal and honest way, to silence any of his critics, I mean, to do that he would have to be a corrupt, egotistical, fascist, wànker, and we all know he most certainly isn't any of those things.

Ray Bloody Purchase

After analysis of the information i have stockpiled on this thread, i deduce an element of sarcasm in certain posts.

Deise Vu

Ray Bloody Purchase wrote: »

What was Keaveneys contribution?

Rather long but fascinating stuff:

www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/colm-keaveney-the-politician-who-switched-sides-1.3369988

www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/colm-keaveney-says-o-brien-speech-was-his-alone-1.2396775

As others have said. None of this will ever fully make sense until it can be discussed without fear of litigation. I am sure people have seen these articles in isolation and wondered what the hell is all this about.

Colonel Claptrap

I'm getting 404 error on those articles.

Are they dead links or is <redacted> onto us?

Colonel Claptrap

I predict some of the details landing on a TD's desk.

A TD can speak under Dail privilege after all.

Odhinn

Colonel Claptrap wrote: »

I'm struggling to understand the Declan Ganley link.

Ganley was critical of O'Brien's fraudulent winning of the mobile phone licence.

O'Brien accusses Ganley as being the secret client of the firm which compiled a dossier on O'Brien. He forced a court to make Ganley a co-defendent in a civil trial to discover the origin of the dossier. Ganley claims to know nothing about this.

Ganley has links to the O'Reilley family who previously controlled INM.

O'Moore (the original investigator appointed by INM board, later replaced by O'Brien) is retained by Ganley in on going litigation related to the mobile phone licence case.

Is this whole thing a revenge plot between the 2 men? Are they in competition with each directly?

Can anyone clarify any of this?

Also, is Robert Pitt a concerned bystander in all this or does he have links to Ganley/O'reilley family?

If you mean O'|Reilly and <Redacted>, then yes and yes.

O'Reilly's message was as revealing as O'Brien's reply: "Strictly Private and Confidential, 3rd July 2003. Dear Gavin, Thank you for your letter dated 23 June. Forgive me, but my first reaction was to throw it in the bin. As far as I'm concerned, Independent News and Media have spent the last seven years trying to destroy my reputation. Some of the coverage of my affairs, both business and personal, in the Sunday Tribune, Sunday Independent, Irish Independent and Evening Herald have caused hurt and enormous damage to my reputation, not to mention the emotional distress suffered by my wife, Catherine, and my family. I very much doubt whether you or any member of your family could have survived a similar onslaught. Control of the media brings privileges and responsibilities.

"While I am waiting for the appropriate time to rectify the damage, I note and appreciate your gesture and in a spirit of goodwill I am willing to meet you to see whether we share any common ground. Yours sincerely, Denis O'Brien."
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/i-m-with-the-old-style-mogul-1.912576

Deise Vu

Colonel Claptrap wrote: »

I'm getting 404 error on those articles.

Are they dead links or is <redacted> onto us?

Jesus that is spooky. I read those articles earlier on my PC but I’m getting 404 now on my phone. Could it just be a phone issue? I would like to summarise the articles but they are painstakingly detailed. I would imagine to prevent any challenges from trigger happy individuals.

Colonel Claptrap

Deise Vu wrote: »

Jesus that is spooky. I read those articles earlier on my PC but I’m getting 404 now on my phone. Could it just be a phone issue? I would like to summarise the articles but they are painstakingly detailed. I would imagine to prevent any challenges from trigger happy individuals.

It's a phone issue. Fine on PC.

Jesus, those articles are crazy.
Sounds like Keaveney is being leaned on to get to Ganley and O'Reilly.

One bit that seemed odd was that Keveney's defamation case against INM remains before the courts. If he had cut some sort of deal with O'Brien, you would think INM would settle the case. However, in the same paragraph the article mentions Keaveney's bankruptcy will run its course in 2 years. What is the author trying to say there?

20Cent

Primetime did a short bit on it. Took the angle of does your employer have the right to view your emails. The coldest of takes on the issue. A decade of emails of journalists and everyone they were in contact with breached. No mention of <redacted> at all.

Colonel Claptrap

One of the more interesting aspects of this -which the Irish Times highlighted - is that the independent newspaper has reported on developments extensively throughout the week. There has been no cover up.

I suspect there is a lot of anger within the ranks of journaliats at the newspaper. Editorial integrity appears to be in tact.

I look forward to this weekend's Sunday independent.

For Forks Sake

Colonel Claptrap wrote: »

I look forward to this weekend's Sunday independent.

...said no-one, ever...

touts

Colonel Claptrap wrote: »

One of the more interesting aspects of this -which the Irish Times highlighted - is that the independent newspaper has reported on developments extensively throughout the week. There has been no cover up.

I suspect there is a lot of anger within the ranks of journaliats at the newspaper. Editorial integrity appears to be in tact.

I look forward to this weekend's Sunday independent.

Coverup has started. http://www.newstalk.com/Former-INM-chief-appalled-at-widespread-publication-of-allegations-against-him-


Now Leslie Buckley is being protrayed as the real victim in all this. Nasty mean media publishing stories about him.

I'd say editorial instruction has come down from redacted o'redacted to attack attack attack.

Deise Vu

touts wrote: »

Coverup has started. http://www.newstalk.com/Former-INM-chief-appalled-at-widespread-publication-of-allegations-against-him-


Now Leslie Buckley is being protrayed as the real victim in all this. Nasty mean media publishing stories about him.

I'd say editorial instruction has come down from redacted o'redacted to attack attack attack.

Yeah, although constrained by the legal process, Les felt compelled to come out and tell us how appalled he was that Journalists seem to have access to the ODCE affidavits. These are legal documents which presumably will be in the public domain anyway. That's just as bad as giving every item of email in an organisation going back 20 years to six external parties isn't it?

I think the message is, we might look like we have overstepped the mark and are in hot water, but me and <redacted> still have limitless funds and Senior Counsel on speed dial. The weekends papers were definitely feeling a lot more confident about explaining the detail and importance of what went on rather than sticking with bare facts.