<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Nightjack: the cloak of anonymity and the mankini of hypocrisy</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.chickyog.net/2009/06/16/nightjack-the-cloak-of-anonymity-and-the-mankini-of-hypocrisy/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.chickyog.net/2009/06/16/nightjack-the-cloak-of-anonymity-and-the-mankini-of-hypocrisy/</link>
	<description>The weblog of Brighton-based writer Justin McKeating</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 21 Mar 2010 18:40:08 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Global Voices dalam bahasa Indonesia &#187; Inggris Raya: Pengadilan Menentang Hak Anonimitas Bloger</title>
		<link>http://www.chickyog.net/2009/06/16/nightjack-the-cloak-of-anonymity-and-the-mankini-of-hypocrisy/comment-page-1/#comment-45734</link>
		<dc:creator>Global Voices dalam bahasa Indonesia &#187; Inggris Raya: Pengadilan Menentang Hak Anonimitas Bloger</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Jun 2009 13:00:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chickyog.net/?p=5703#comment-45734</guid>
		<description>[...] Mereka yang membuat perbandingan antara bloger anonim dan sumber jurnalis anonim. Contoh Sara McConnell dan Justin McKeating. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Mereka yang membuat perbandingan antara bloger anonim dan sumber jurnalis anonim. Contoh Sara McConnell dan Justin McKeating. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Where everybody knows your name &#171; Too Much To Say For Myself</title>
		<link>http://www.chickyog.net/2009/06/16/nightjack-the-cloak-of-anonymity-and-the-mankini-of-hypocrisy/comment-page-1/#comment-45729</link>
		<dc:creator>Where everybody knows your name &#171; Too Much To Say For Myself</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 27 Jun 2009 22:29:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chickyog.net/?p=5703#comment-45729</guid>
		<description>[...] anyone who&#8217;s been following the story about the shameful exposure by the Times of the blogger NightJack will be aware, anonymous bloggers run the risk of having [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] anyone who&#8217;s been following the story about the shameful exposure by the Times of the blogger NightJack will be aware, anonymous bloggers run the risk of having [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Readers Edition &#187; Großbritannien: Gericht entscheidet gegen die Anonymitätsrechte eines Bloggers</title>
		<link>http://www.chickyog.net/2009/06/16/nightjack-the-cloak-of-anonymity-and-the-mankini-of-hypocrisy/comment-page-1/#comment-45717</link>
		<dc:creator>Readers Edition &#187; Großbritannien: Gericht entscheidet gegen die Anonymitätsrechte eines Bloggers</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Jun 2009 02:02:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chickyog.net/?p=5703#comment-45717</guid>
		<description>[...] - anonyme Blogger mit anonymen Quellen f&#252;r Journalisten vergleichen, wie Sara McConnell und Justin McKeating. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] &#8211; anonyme Blogger mit anonymen Quellen f&#252;r Journalisten vergleichen, wie Sara McConnell und Justin McKeating. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Privacy needs pro-active security &#124; MindHack</title>
		<link>http://www.chickyog.net/2009/06/16/nightjack-the-cloak-of-anonymity-and-the-mankini-of-hypocrisy/comment-page-1/#comment-45716</link>
		<dc:creator>Privacy needs pro-active security &#124; MindHack</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Jun 2009 19:27:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chickyog.net/?p=5703#comment-45716</guid>
		<description>[...] Nightjack: the cloak of anonymity and the mankini of hypocrisy &#8230; [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Nightjack: the cloak of anonymity and the mankini of hypocrisy &#8230; [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Global Voices auf Deutsch &#187; Großbritannien: Gericht entscheidet gegen die Anonymitätsrechte eines Bloggers</title>
		<link>http://www.chickyog.net/2009/06/16/nightjack-the-cloak-of-anonymity-and-the-mankini-of-hypocrisy/comment-page-1/#comment-45715</link>
		<dc:creator>Global Voices auf Deutsch &#187; Großbritannien: Gericht entscheidet gegen die Anonymitätsrechte eines Bloggers</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Jun 2009 17:10:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chickyog.net/?p=5703#comment-45715</guid>
		<description>[...] anonyme Blogger mit anonymen Quellen für Journalisten vergleichen, wie Sara McConnell und Justin McKeating. andere Kritik am Vorgehen der Times in diesem Fall äußern, z.B. Hopi Sen, ehemaliger anonymer [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] anonyme Blogger mit anonymen Quellen für Journalisten vergleichen, wie Sara McConnell und Justin McKeating. andere Kritik am Vorgehen der Times in diesem Fall äußern, z.B. Hopi Sen, ehemaliger anonymer [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: AnonyHack</title>
		<link>http://www.chickyog.net/2009/06/16/nightjack-the-cloak-of-anonymity-and-the-mankini-of-hypocrisy/comment-page-1/#comment-45714</link>
		<dc:creator>AnonyHack</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Jun 2009 14:40:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chickyog.net/?p=5703#comment-45714</guid>
		<description>Journalists&#039; sources are always sacrosanct - to them. Other journalists&#039; sources are not sacrosanct in the slightest, and there has been reams and reams of copy written over the years either identifying or attempting to identify the sources of big stories. Look at the Telegraph&#039;s coverage of the MPs&#039; expenses scandal - other newspapers have done their best to flush out the source.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Journalists&#8217; sources are always sacrosanct &#8211; to them. Other journalists&#8217; sources are not sacrosanct in the slightest, and there has been reams and reams of copy written over the years either identifying or attempting to identify the sources of big stories. Look at the Telegraph&#8217;s coverage of the MPs&#8217; expenses scandal &#8211; other newspapers have done their best to flush out the source.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Global Voices Online &#187; United Kingdom: Court decides against a blogger&#8217;s rights to anonymity</title>
		<link>http://www.chickyog.net/2009/06/16/nightjack-the-cloak-of-anonymity-and-the-mankini-of-hypocrisy/comment-page-1/#comment-45713</link>
		<dc:creator>Global Voices Online &#187; United Kingdom: Court decides against a blogger&#8217;s rights to anonymity</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Jun 2009 11:05:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chickyog.net/?p=5703#comment-45713</guid>
		<description>[...] Those who make comparisons between anonymous bloggers and anonymous journalistic sources. Eg. Sara McConnell and Justin McKeating. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Those who make comparisons between anonymous bloggers and anonymous journalistic sources. Eg. Sara McConnell and Justin McKeating. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Shackleford Hurtmore</title>
		<link>http://www.chickyog.net/2009/06/16/nightjack-the-cloak-of-anonymity-and-the-mankini-of-hypocrisy/comment-page-1/#comment-45702</link>
		<dc:creator>Shackleford Hurtmore</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Jun 2009 10:30:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chickyog.net/?p=5703#comment-45702</guid>
		<description>If only there was some kind of law, perhaps section 76 of the Counter-Terrorism Act 2008, that makes it illegal to elicit information about a police officer, none of this could have happened.

I also expect that Justice Eady&#039;s personal details will be published in the interests of an open justice system... we have a right to know what his personal interests are, in case they mean he would have a conflict of interests when presiding over cases...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If only there was some kind of law, perhaps section 76 of the Counter-Terrorism Act 2008, that makes it illegal to elicit information about a police officer, none of this could have happened.</p>
<p>I also expect that Justice Eady&#8217;s personal details will be published in the interests of an open justice system&#8230; we have a right to know what his personal interests are, in case they mean he would have a conflict of interests when presiding over cases&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The complicated case of the (now not) anonymous police blogger, The Times, and &#8216;public interest&#8217; &#124; Online Journalism Blog</title>
		<link>http://www.chickyog.net/2009/06/16/nightjack-the-cloak-of-anonymity-and-the-mankini-of-hypocrisy/comment-page-1/#comment-45701</link>
		<dc:creator>The complicated case of the (now not) anonymous police blogger, The Times, and &#8216;public interest&#8217; &#124; Online Journalism Blog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Jun 2009 09:54:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chickyog.net/?p=5703#comment-45701</guid>
		<description>[...] 7: Fellow public service blogger and ambulance driver Tom Reynolds gives his views on the case. Chicken Yoghurt gives his on the media&#8217;s use of anonymous sources. David MacLean responds: &#8220;Of course journalists rely on anonymous sources, but if a rival [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] 7: Fellow public service blogger and ambulance driver Tom Reynolds gives his views on the case. Chicken Yoghurt gives his on the media&#8217;s use of anonymous sources. David MacLean responds: &#8220;Of course journalists rely on anonymous sources, but if a rival [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bloggere fradømt retten til anonymitet &#171; NONA: nettverket for oss som jobber med nettmedier</title>
		<link>http://www.chickyog.net/2009/06/16/nightjack-the-cloak-of-anonymity-and-the-mankini-of-hypocrisy/comment-page-1/#comment-45700</link>
		<dc:creator>Bloggere fradømt retten til anonymitet &#171; NONA: nettverket for oss som jobber med nettmedier</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Jun 2009 09:34:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.chickyog.net/?p=5703#comment-45700</guid>
		<description>[...] Suw Charman-Anderson, en veteran på den britiske bloggescenen, tvitrer: &#8220;Det virker som The Times synes at det er en fin sport å oute bloggere, men de beskytter sine egne kilder når det er i deres interesse å gjøre det.&#8221; Justin McKeating, som skriver den populære politiske bloggen Chicken Yoghurt, har en lengre argumentasjon i samme gate her. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Suw Charman-Anderson, en veteran på den britiske bloggescenen, tvitrer: &#8220;Det virker som The Times synes at det er en fin sport å oute bloggere, men de beskytter sine egne kilder når det er i deres interesse å gjøre det.&#8221; Justin McKeating, som skriver den populære politiske bloggen Chicken Yoghurt, har en lengre argumentasjon i samme gate her. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
