CNN Airs Another Soft Report on Hacker Group 'Anonymous'
The internet group "Anonymous" claimed to have shut down the websites of the Justice Department and FBI, but that didn't stop CNN's Amber Lyon from giving them the soft treatment. Her Friday report on the group of hackers and thieves contained no voices of opposition but allowed the group to defend its escapades.
Lyon remained neutral on the group's tactics, from reporting their "favorite weapon" of web attacks to asking how long it took them to crash the Justice Department website. [Video below the break. Click here for audio.]
And Lyon also gave members a chance to refute labels of the group as "terrorists" and "hackers on steroids." She asked one member why he was laughing at the caricatures, and even added that "you've heard this, I'm sure, thousands of times".
The man answered that a "vast number" of the group's members are not hackers – echoing Lyon's earlier assessment of them as mostly "average Joe Americans."
A brief transcript of the segment, which aired on January 20 at 3:18 p.m. EST, is as follows:
AMBER LYON, CNN correspondent: (On-camera) Some people consider Anonymous – you've heard this, I'm sure, thousands of times – hackers on steroids. Other people call you guys terrorists – you're laughing at this, I can even see through that mask. Why do you laugh at that?
ANONYMOUS: I would say a vast number of people involved in Anonymous aren't hackers at all. Some don't even have any programming skills whatsoever. I wouldn't consider myself a hacker.
LYON: Anons say this online protest was one of their largest – and to expect more.
ANONYMOUS: Expect us.
- Matt Hadro's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
I say more power to 'em.
Submitted by Kenny Bunkport on Fri, 01/20/2012 - 8:27pm.
I say more power to 'em. After decades of ripping off the consumer, the entertainment industry gets what it deserves.
classic parasitic argument
Submitted by Tyler520 on Sat, 01/21/2012 - 12:17pm.
Sounds like you'd find better company with the #occupiers
I would agree if
Submitted by dzejk113 on Fri, 01/20/2012 - 8:57pm.
the entertainment industry was their only target, but when they post personal information of police officers online just because that cop was enforcing laws they don't agree with, or when they steal peoples identities and donate stolen money to charity, I say arrest 'em, try 'em, and throw 'em in jail.
Targeting the entertainment
Submitted by redfish on Sat, 01/21/2012 - 2:00am.
Targeting the entertainment industry is the least offensive of what they do, yea... but I find vigilantism bad in all its forms. People shouldn't give it moral cover just because they agree with the cause.
What?
Submitted by Timothy H on Fri, 01/20/2012 - 11:12pm.
This is the most bogus and childish argument there is for stealing someone else's work.
Explain how the industry ripped you off without pretending like you should be entitled to someone else's creative works for free.
Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe. -Albert Einstein
And for blonde:Some days it just doesn't pay to chew through the restraint. -Timothy H
Patents don't last forever,
Submitted by Kenny Bunkport on Sat, 01/21/2012 - 1:03am.
Patents don't last forever, why should copyrights? (I know 75 years, but if you're Disney, you can pay lawyers to get that stretched indefinitely). Most patents are 19 years, some shorter. It's an arbitrary concept at best. Hollywood isn't rich for no reason.
Why do I pay full price for each new type of media that comes out for decades old material? Why do you pay new price for a Blu-Ray disc of "Gone with the Wind", when you already paid for it on VHS, Laserdisc, and DVD? It's not like they had to reshoot the damn thing. Everyone who had anything to do with the making of that movie is dead and the studio went bankrupt. If I were a manufacturer coming out with a product based on decades old technology, I'd have to compete with other companies using the same technology. That's why your TV set doesn't cost $10,000, because no one has patents anymore on design concepts like circuit boards or resistors.
Why don't you hear "Happy Birthday" on TV shows? Because they would have to pay royalties to the family of two sisters who wrote the damn thing 120 years ago and are long dead. And they probably heard it from some traveling gypsy band.
Maybe if the Entertainment suits would have worked harder to be a part of a new technology, maybe they wouldn't be in this pickle. Their reaction since day one of the internet has been to pound it with the legal hammer. And when that don't work buy more draconian legislation to stifle true free enterprise. What if some typewriter company had an indefinite patent on the QWERTY keyboard or maybe keyboards in general? That would have certainly slowed the growth of the PC industry.
Fair money for work is fair, but we have the most ridiculous copyright laws in the world, and Big Entertainment throws their millions at politicians to keep the laws ridiculous...you know what? It kind of makes me want to screw them back.
But hey, that's just how I feel.
About your signature
Submitted by Kenny Bunkport on Sat, 01/21/2012 - 1:46am.
About your signature quotation.
Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe. -Albert Einstein
If the literary world was as aggressive as RIAA and MPAA lawyers:
First, you wouldn't even be able to read this quote, unless it were in a licensed form, such as a copyrighted book. You might be able to purchase this passage for $.99 or you could buy the licensed book for $24.99. (perusing prior to purchase is not allowed). And of course NO PHOTOCOPIES!
Second, even if you bought the passage or book, you couldn't post it on this forum because it could be cut and pasted elsewhere and then the owner of the licensed material wouldn't get his "fair share". In fact you've just "file shared" an unauthorized copy of part of Albert Einstein's work (of which someone owns the copyright for) without permission and recompensation.
It's not as cut and dried as they'd like you to believe.
If pigs had wings, they could fly
Submitted by ckc1227 on Sat, 01/21/2012 - 4:26am.
It is pretty cut and dried. You just want to get stuff for free that you aren't entitled to. Let me guess.....you're a Democrat?
Let me guess...
Submitted by Jer on Sat, 01/21/2012 - 4:40am.
You haven't read any of Kenny Bunkport's previously posted comments.
Jer
Did we expect anything less?
Submitted by The Vet on Sun, 01/22/2012 - 12:18pm.
He is a cut and run poster in the tradition of Tenebrous and Willis_Leon_Johnson. All have a bad habit of attacking fellow conservative posters and running on to post obliviously in other blogs. Note Kenny Bunkport's unanswered posts below.
The Entertainment industry
Submitted by Kenny Bunkport on Sat, 01/21/2012 - 1:28pm.
The Entertainment industry has enjoyed protectionism perks beyond that of most other industries in this country, short of a sanctioned monopoly (like the postal service). I think I'm the one who should be finger wagging. I thought you guys were all laissez faire Republicans?
If you get down to it, what SOPA and PIPA are trying to do is exactly what the Entertainment industry has already done with music and film. That is, make it illegal to use any written material without permission. Yet, that's something your not happy with. Hey, why shouldn't writers make money from their "creative property" like musicians and actors? Why should you get to quote them for free?
Yet, here is the Entertainment industry demanding the Feds make even more laws because they are on the verge of losing top to bottom complete control. This is a case where I think many Republicans are thinking like Democrats (More laws! More Government! More regulations!)
Your arguments are no better than the anti-voucher argument for schools. Yes, that's exactly one of their arguments, that each voucher given is stealing money from the public schools funds. Now where are you on that issue? I'm the one suggesting a more free market approach. There is nothing capitalistic in demanding strangulation legislation because you are getting outfoxed by your competition.
Democrat hardly, and certainly not anti-business. Mindlessly jumping on a side just because that's the side you're usually on (in this case business), is something that the KosKids do. I proudly admit that sometimes I'm against an issue in the Republican canon, because I am not foremost a Republican nor conservative. I am an individual first, who happens to agree with Republicans and conservatives 95% of the time and with liberals and Democrats very seldom (but not never). By the way, a good number of Democrats favor SOPA and PIPA, because it is more regulation.
Tip of my hat to Jer, who seems (I assume) to understand this is a regulation and monopoly issue, as well as a piracy issue.
I think what's eluding those
Submitted by Kenny Bunkport on Sat, 01/21/2012 - 2:54pm.
I think what's eluding those who are more interested in labeling me than looking at the issue, is that SOPA and PIPA are merely using the precedent established by the recording and film industry regarding "intellectual" and "creative" properties. A precedent that was allowed because we were all asleep at the wheel.
Using RIAA and MPAA standards, this site (and dozens like it) are nothing but a big piracy operation. The writers here copy wholesale material from other sources such as AP and the NYTimes. I assume without expressed permission or compensation. Much of it is copyrighted and their writers are paid for their contributions (so it is creative property). Why can't they demand complete control over their "intellectual property"? Often their works are used to promote a view in direct opposition to the original artists intent. (Sounds a bit like Bruce Springstein forcing Ronald Reagan to stop using "Born in the USA", doesn't it?)
You all happily enjoy a venue which is nothing different than Megaupload or Pirate Bay in its "theft" of intellectual property. My point is that not only are SOPA and PIPA a stifle on free speech, but existing copyright laws regarding music and film have already crossed that line. Try posting a movie clip or song to prove a point and see how fast you're forced to remove it.
Megaupload was shut down completely without hearing because they are accused of piracy. I think you DO understand that if PIPA or SOPA pass, this site will be shut down with the stroke of a pen. Yet you fail to see that's a luxury the RIAA and MPAA already enjoy. That is an atrocity.
Should PIPA or SOPA come to pass, you'll be rooting Anonymous like they were the French Underground.
We will all get the last laugh.....
Submitted by bohratom on Sat, 01/21/2012 - 1:38am.
We will all get the last laugh when anonymous, on a whim, takes down CNN for some story about pimple faced kids having lower IQs then the rest of the population. Its not a matter of if, its a matter of when.
Anytime you have a group that feels it has to answer to nobody, including police and the feds, they will make every other group their target.
There are a lot of
Submitted by Rowane on Sat, 01/21/2012 - 3:00am.
There are a lot of "white-hat" hackers out there, most of whom despise the anony-twerps.
You've got to stand for something, or you'll fall for anything. (Aaron Tippin)
dregs of society
Submitted by Tyler520 on Sat, 01/21/2012 - 12:24pm.
I wonder when the media will analyze Anonymous' propensity and appetite for kiddie porn - after all, they are more often than not arrested for possession and distribution of child porn than hacking