Slashdot Mirror
Fox Hacks Fark
circletimessquare writes "Valleywag.com is reporting on a case of a hacker not covering his tracks. It seems that, via a targeted email, an admin at Fark.com downloaded a trojan, which was used to steal passwords for Fark servers. Notably, these activities were traced to an IP address in Memphis Tennessee, and to a Fox News new-media reporter. As to the veracity of the story, that is bolstered by the fact that the story was greenlit for the front page of Fark. Motive? That could range from Fark being a rumored Fox takeover target, to stealing source code for a competing Fox social networking site. If the story is true, laws have been broken, but perhaps not by the Fox News reporter: it's possible his computer was hacked as well. Whatever the truth, it's a very entertaining read, as it pushes a number of hot buttons."
Fox News Channel is an entirely different thing than a local Fox affiliate, even one that is owned by News Corp. The summary above should make that more clear.
Fox News Reporter == Journalist?
Well, actually, even my own biased opinion wouldn't label most Fox employees as 'not journalists' - but everytime I consider the Fox news network as a whole, I just can't think of it as a news network.
This was not a reporter from the cable Fox News Channel, but a news anchor from a local Fox TV station. You know, the same one that shows Family Guy and The Simpsons. That is not FNC, which shows Bill O'reilly and Geraldo.
There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
For those that didn't get the reference.
Where are all you guys getting "news anchor" from? (I'm not even going to ask where the submitter and editor hallucinated "reporter" from.) The article describes him as the "new media manager" -- i.e. the head of their website and related activities.
The elaborate fantasies in the link still seem unlikely, but this is a relatively tech-savvy guy, not the sportscaster.
What I'm listening to now on Pandora...
It went here. Now, don't come complaining to me about hairy palms or blindness...in fact, don't even tell me what you did at all.
hello, i wrote that summary
...and, btw, there's nothing wrong with rupert murdoch seeding his conservative point of view in his media acquisitions. it's a free country, and his media conglomerate has obviously done quite well financially by addressing a conservative fan base. good for him, good for fox news (local and national)
it's not just an affiliate, it's not just getting house, 24, and the simpsons
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WHBQ-TV
it's owned by rupert murdoch. if you hadn't noticed, murdoch has a pretty solid track record of seeding his media acquisitions with his particular conservative point of view
however, it is certainly disingenuous of you to think that distancing fox affiliates from each other is supposed to instill innoculation for fox (national) from implication for this hack
no: the proper way for you to innoculate fox from the implications of any wrongdoing here is to point out, compellingly and reasonably, that this is probably the actions of a lone idiot, not fox news (local) or fox news (national)
IF this guy is guilty (and he could be hacked and framed himself), i think it is certain the guy is just a lone idiot. the question being: why would fox hack fark? there's no valid reason for them to do that. but there is a valid reason for a new media reporter trying to build a social networking site to do that
having said that (that the hacking in question here most definitely is not representative of fox news), it is intellectually dishonest of you to draw distance between a local fox station and the national one in this case as a defensive posture. they are all owned by rupert murdoch. maybe you just didn't know, but it sounds like you're spinning
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Sounds like you are banned. That's what they do. Much less confrontational that way.