Exactly.The NOTWs video seems fair enough to me, a good scoop. Dunno about anywhere else, but if you sit in a bar talking openly like that, you shouldn't be surprised to see it in the paper.
What's going on with Rooney?I'm struggling to get the website open, server overload. Probably people wanting to read the Rooney scoop.
The NOTWs video seems fair enough to me, a good scoop. Dunno about anywhere else, but if you sit in a bar talking openly like that, you shouldn't be surprised to see it in the paper.
Yup. Agree witht this. It's life I'm afraid, if you're stupid enough to make comments like he did, then it's perfectly reasonably for the NOTW to publish them.Exactly.
Reporters are under no obligation to inform people that they're on the record - you really should assume you are if you aren't told otherwise. It was Yasir Hameed's responsibility to request that their conversation be off the record. If he didn't do that, it's fair game.
He's a footballer - that's news?He's been up to no good with prostitutes
Because it was obviously a trusted confidant to whom he was bitching about his team mates and speculating about how they are corrupt and fix matches? He said this to someone he obviously didn't know that well, and is just finding it awkward to find himself being quoted back now. It's not illegal nor underhanded to record your conversations with someone, even if they don't know. It's not like the NOTW recorded a private conversation of his with a third party - their man was a party to the conversation so anything Hameed said to them, he said to the NOTW.It is not. Basically you are saying papparazzis are the best journalists in the world. Hameed maynot be willing to go public because of many reasons, ncluding potential threats on his life and those of his family members. Blatant abuse of confidentiality.
You've summed up this aspect of the NOTW's work very well. But when they lift the lid on corruption (which has until now evidently gone more or less unchecked by the powers-that-be) the ends justify the dirty and underhand means.It might be good investigative journalism but it seems dirty and underhanded as hell.
Exactly mate, it must make you wonder how long it would have taken for them to get exposed (even IF they ever got exposed) if it was just down to the ICC.You've summed up this aspect of the NOTW's work very well. But when they lift the lid on corruption (which has until now evidently gone more or less unchecked by the powers-that-be) the ends justify the dirty and underhand means.
Pretty sure whatever they say won't be treated as strong evidence in court, as the player can simply say he lied, as he was under no need to speak the truth.The method used by NOTW is absolutely fine..........Afterall the bookie and players would have told nothing if asked straight away. Infact great work done by NOTW.
Surprisingly accurate. Although not the sort of foul play that was predicted.Also another factor I am worried about is English media crying foul when Aamer stars reversing the ball and grabs 4 wickets.
Surprisingly inaccurate.football season will start soon, so our gutter media will hardly notice there's cricket going on, TBH.
That sounds fairly flimsy to me.Pretty sure whatever they say won't be treated as strong evidence in court, as the player can simply say he lied, as he was under no need to speak the truth.