Showing posts with label freedom of information. Show all posts
Showing posts with label freedom of information. Show all posts
eventually pops out
Politics This FOI request about the Damien Green affair speaks for itself, the way the request knocks on for ages, goes through several internal enquiries and then eventually pops out with a couple of emails between someone redacted at ITN and Gutto Hari "former BBC Chief Political Correspondent (who) in May 2008 was appointed as supposed Communications Director for the Mayor of London Boris Johnson's administration at London City Hall" (wikipedia) then someone at the police. I don't know that any of it is really news, but it is worth looking at to see how people communicate within local government and with both the national media and the force. Those emails are in a pdf here, a mix of straight cander and not.
in this day and age
TV Two of the Doctor Who related FOI requests I reported on here have finally been answered and ... they fell outside the scope of the act. The letter about Internal BBC reaction to there being no series of Doctor Who in 2009 has no new information.
On the question of the crafting of the press release, we're told that it was drafted by Taylor Herring Public Relations not someone internal which is a bit interesting since I always thought these things were put together by the corporation's in-house press office, though it makes sense that they'd hire some flexible experts in this day and age.
The one about communications between ICM and BBC has been delayed, presumably because it requires the co-operation of the production team and they're a bit busy at the moment.
On the question of the crafting of the press release, we're told that it was drafted by Taylor Herring Public Relations not someone internal which is a bit interesting since I always thought these things were put together by the corporation's in-house press office, though it makes sense that they'd hire some flexible experts in this day and age.
The one about communications between ICM and BBC has been delayed, presumably because it requires the co-operation of the production team and they're a bit busy at the moment.
as a fan I could care less
TV Not too long ago I posted about an FOI request looking for information about what went on between the BBC and RSC in relation to David Tennant playing Hamlet. Well, having not got the information they wanted, the questioner is looking under some other rocks. Here's three more:
Communications between the BBC and a talent agency.
All recorded information used to create the press release which said that Who wouldn't be returning for a whole series in 2009
Internal memos within the BBC related the 'crisis' caused by the same lack of Whoness.
The last two requests are particularly fantastic since they include whole sections of RTD's book The Writer's Tale to try and illustrate why this information is in the public interest. I think the questioner thinks there was some kind of cover up or that someone isn't telling the truth about what went on, but even as a fan I could care less. People have jobs to do and it's really the end product which is most important.
As I've said before I'd much the rather show be rested a little bit than driving itself into the ground creatively again. Plus it's not like the show isn't in production, and in fact what with Torchwood and The Sarah Jane Adventures, people have been working at Cardiff right through, bless them. Still, I can't say I won't be interested in the outcome -- as I said in the previous post, this is precisely the kind of internal conversation which isn't usually produced until much later.
Anyway, I'll keep you updated when an answer is forthcoming.
Communications between the BBC and a talent agency.
All recorded information used to create the press release which said that Who wouldn't be returning for a whole series in 2009
Internal memos within the BBC related the 'crisis' caused by the same lack of Whoness.
The last two requests are particularly fantastic since they include whole sections of RTD's book The Writer's Tale to try and illustrate why this information is in the public interest. I think the questioner thinks there was some kind of cover up or that someone isn't telling the truth about what went on, but even as a fan I could care less. People have jobs to do and it's really the end product which is most important.
As I've said before I'd much the rather show be rested a little bit than driving itself into the ground creatively again. Plus it's not like the show isn't in production, and in fact what with Torchwood and The Sarah Jane Adventures, people have been working at Cardiff right through, bless them. Still, I can't say I won't be interested in the outcome -- as I said in the previous post, this is precisely the kind of internal conversation which isn't usually produced until much later.
Anyway, I'll keep you updated when an answer is forthcoming.
erasure disguised as ‘progress’
Books Another FOI request. Author Iain Sinclair was due to promote his book Hackney, That Rose-Red Empire: A Confidential Report at Stoke Newington Library but the launch was notoriously cancelled (Tom Roper collects further background and links).
Sinclair, himself, writing (alright) in The Guardian, said that he thought the launch had been cancelled because of an essay he wrote for the London Review of Books criticising the effect that part of the new London olympic site was having on the local community which he says has nothing to do with the content of the book.
This FOI request clarifies things somewhat.
As you can see from the emails (you'll have to cock your head to the right) which passed back and forth within Hackney Council, everyone was very positive, until someone did a risk assessment -- or in this case looked the book up on Amazon and read the synopsis:
Which just demonstrates yet again that there are two sides to every story. I'm not surprised the launch was cancelled. True, there may be free speech related issues, but why would you invite someone round just so that they can tell you how rubbish you are?
Sinclair, himself, writing (alright) in The Guardian, said that he thought the launch had been cancelled because of an essay he wrote for the London Review of Books criticising the effect that part of the new London olympic site was having on the local community which he says has nothing to do with the content of the book.
This FOI request clarifies things somewhat.
As you can see from the emails (you'll have to cock your head to the right) which passed back and forth within Hackney Council, everyone was very positive, until someone did a risk assessment -- or in this case looked the book up on Amazon and read the synopsis:
"Once an Arcadian suburb of grand houses, orchards and conservatories, Hackney declined into a zone of asylums, hospitals and dirty industry. Persistently revived, reinvented, betrayed, it has become a symbol of inner-city chaos, crime and poverty. Now, the Olympics, a final attempt to clamp down on a renegade spirit, seeks to complete the process: erasure disguised as ‘progress’."They decided that the book "may contain criticism of Hackney Borough Council" (oh really?) and that it might attracted the wrong kind of press coverage and swiftly cancelled the launch. So in fact, the cancellation had nothing to do with the LRB article and everything to do with the content of the book which based on that synopsis appears to be an incendiary piece of work about the local area.
Which just demonstrates yet again that there are two sides to every story. I'm not surprised the launch was cancelled. True, there may be free speech related issues, but why would you invite someone round just so that they can tell you how rubbish you are?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)