Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Gript-A source of misinformation. **Read OP before posting**

1888990919294»

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,379 ✭✭✭corkie


    Thanks @CramCycle for the clarification on the fact it was an opinion column! Was aware of that myself.

    It publish under that segment of the paper, because as far as I'm aware the author is not a staff reporter/journalist of the paper?

    • Dr TJ McIntyre is an associate professor in the UCD Sutherland School of Law, consultant solicitor with FP Logue Solicitors and chairperson of Digital Rights Ireland.

    It was written by a person, with some standing, and not submitted by some unknown hack writer.

    Edit: Also got covered in Independent today.

    Screenshot_2025-02-23-14-58-55-69_40deb401b9ffe8e1df2f1cc5ba480b12.jpg

    Sorry on mobile, had a read of the paper in sisters house just now. Search 'Gript' on the site.

    Post edited by corkie on

    ⓘ "At some point something inside me just clicked and I realized that I didn't have to deal with anyone's bullshit ever again."
    » “mundus sine caesaribus” «



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 25,987 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    At no point did I say it was by a hack. I merely pointed out it was an opinion piece which was interesting and raised very valid points in regards legal protection for journalists in Ireland. It also, like any good opinion piece, raised valid points for discussion.

    I also wasn't saying you did or didn't know, I was clarifying as another poster was commenting on whether it had more weight now it was being reported in the IT.

    Colin Murphys piece makes the same point with the more nuanced view of a journalist it may directly affect.

    After reading both opinion pieces, I don't disagree with their views. Also, on a personal level, having watched two criminals escape free after getting away on a warrant technicality, I see the Gardas point of view of being vague so that nothing becomes inadmissible.

    Someone here asked, why didn't they just ask Gript, I see that point as well. A journalist in the Indo or IT (and I like neither publication), satisfied it would not put a source at risk would most likely hand over the videos as long as they were not incriminating (this is an opinion, they might not). The Gript videos, whether this view is agreed with or not, would quite possibly implicate not only the video taker and potentially staff members of the publisher as guilty parties. Being a journalist does not indemnify someone against the law. For those concerned about my accusations, I don't believe them to be. Gript is quite openly inflammatory and I would see some of their opinion pieces as borderline illegal in regards to incitement to hatred.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,701 ✭✭✭✭Tony EH


    Always funny when people who clearly lean to the right, in some case the extreme right, try to pretend that they're "centrists".



  • Posts: 0 ✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Mod Edit: Warning issued re: ignoring mod instructions in OP

    Post edited by Necro on


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,249 ✭✭✭crusd


    Journalist privilege is the right of Journalists not to reveal their sources without suffering any consequences.

    Its not doctor patient privilege or lawyer client privilege. If a reasonable assessment of fact determines that communications contain evidence of a crime or conspiracy to commit crime, authorities can apply for a warrant to access that information. As long as its above board and not completed on a spurious basis its fine.

    And in fact even doctor patient and lawyer client privilege is not universal. If they have information about someone in potential danger they are obliged by law to report it.



  • Advertisement
Advertisement