Newspaper Crowdsources 700,000-Page Investigation of MP Expenses 188
projector writes with an interesting project from the UK: "The Guardian are crowd-sourcing the investigation of 700,000 pages of UK MPs' expenses data. Readers are being invited to categorize each document, transcribe the handwritten expenses details into an online form and alert the newspaper if any claims merit further investigation. 'Some pages will be covering letters, or claim forms for office stationery. But somewhere in here is the receipt for a duck island. And who knows what else may turn up. If you find something which you think needs further attention, simply hit the button marked "investigate this!" and we'll take a closer look.'"
Power to the people! (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:I know this isn't the point.... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:I know this isn't the point.... (Score:3, Interesting)
Which is why we shouldn't be electing just anyone, but testing their ethics and wisdom etc. at least, or better yet, not electing representatives at all.
Re:I know this isn't the point.... (Score:3, Interesting)
. . . and the job of those who oversee and regulate these things is to prevent abuse
Actually not. The office responsible for overseeing MP's expense claims actually saw it as their job to ensure that Members maximised their income within the stated rules. Most of what has happened happened under advice from the guards - they were guarding MP's interests not those of the taxpayer.
Re:Waste of time? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:I know this isn't the point.... (Score:2, Interesting)
But I'm pretty sure that almost ANYONE in their shoes would have done the same...it's called the human condition. You are given the power to abuse something and you think nobody will notice....so you do. Flame away but i probably would have.
I doubt almost everybody, but yeah a lot of people would. Which just makes it even more important not to let them get away with it. So that you and everybody else will think twice in the same situation.
Re:Why TF doesn't it happen in US? (Score:5, Interesting)
It works both ways. The British government and the American government simultaneously had meetings with the Federal Reserve and the Bank of England 2 days ago.
Obama came out with tough new regulations. Gordon Brown came saying one wishy washy thing, whilst the Bank of England didn't get the tougher regulations they were asking for, and now want to challenge the government in court.
And as for the British press being cool, here's a quick rundown:
The Sun: Trashy tabloid, most popular paper, tells thick people who to vote for. Banned in Liverpool after a controversial story suggesting Liverpool fans were responsible for the Hillsborough disaster
The Mirror: Wishes it was the sun. Even more trashy.
The Times: Owned by Murdoch, like the Sun, but seems to understand that its readerbase has brains, whilst trying to slip political opinion through without you noticing.
The Independent: "independent", my arse. I used to read this. As much as I was against the Iraq war, I don't appreciate being lectured on it on a daily basis. They like preaching to the converted. People supposedly buy this one because it lacks opinion. The editor is best mates with the head of MI6. Also horrifically boring.
The Daily Mail: Right wing christian crap, obsessed with house prices and Elizabeth Hurley. Encourages people who haven't even watched the show to complain to the BBC about someone saying something rude, and complain they do, in their thousands.
The Guardian: They write this in a very small font, just so they can fit in the HUGE essays written by political activists who like to drone on and on and on about some green issue whilst everyone else has fallen asleep. You can read the entirety of the Sun in the time it takes to read the front page of the Guardian.
The Telegraph: Like the Daily Mail, but with less readers. Also obsessed with Elizabeth Hurley. Source of the expenses scandal, which they've been milking for nearly 2 months now. Ok, the MPs did wrong, but they also have jobs to do, and all they've been doing for the past 2 months is apologise, resign, and shout at eachother.
The People: Apparently still running. First UK paper to be printed in colour, but I haven't seen it on sale anywhere for years.
Metro: Free newspaper found outside tube and train stations. Written by the same company as the daily mail, but with all the political bias taken out. Designed to be read in 20 minutes. Always has a stupid non-news story on page 3 about someone's pet cat climbing Everest or something. Letters page
Various regional newspapers: "Local man bitten by local dog in local park". Win tickets to see Neasden FC playing this Saturday!!!
Private Eye: Fortnightly paper. Reports on the newspapers themselves. Prints stuff that newspapers don't dare print from freelance journalists because of the potential implications. Editor is Ian Hislop who is "the most sued man in Britain". Very cynical, and often quite funny.
So. The British press is shit.
Re:I know this isn't the point.... (Score:3, Interesting)
No newspaper is a pillar of justice and righteousness. The Guardian may be closer to a pillar of hypocrisy [order-order.com] and leftiousness, but it does report actual news in an accurate and fairly even-handed manner. I tend to swing between the Guardian and the Telegraph depending on the front page, though I wouldn't sign up to the stance of either. I can stomach either as long as I avoid the editorials*.
Having said that, the Guardian does employ Polly Toynbee, a typical champagne socialist [order-order.com], and a hypocrite to boot [youtube.com]**.
In terms of size, the Guardian is the third biggest of what used to be called the broadsheets and you could consider as the real newspapers. The most popular is the Telegraph, but the Sun has ten times the readership at about 8million readers. The Guardian is on about 1/20th of that.
*The Guardian; 'All these capitalists are stealing money from the workers by avoiding tax! This is evil! Unless we're doing it!'
The Telegraph; 'The problem with young people is that too many of them are immigrants and none of them are whipped enough, what?'
**Please don't misconstrue this as support of Littlejohn. A stopped clock is right twice a day etc etc.
Re:I know this isn't the point.... (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:I know this isn't the point.... (Score:2, Interesting)
That depends on your political perception. It is registered as supporting the Labour Party. The same Labour Party that is doing the redacting here. Their "outrage" at the censorship, may just be spin. While there's been minor criticisms of the Government in the past, they are the Government's lone supportive voice in the media (other than much of the BBC).
It's very likely that the crowd doing their sourcing, are Labour Party members, or supporters. I doubt very much anyone else reads the Guardian.
On the other hand, they've been lagging so far behind the Telegraph for years in readership, and the Telegraph has completely owned the whole expenses debacle. So it may be that they are trying to look relevant and investigative, long after the fact. A save our skins attempt to generate sales.
They are, of course, not the only news source looking at this, and it is important to have balance and all points of view in this. But trusting the Guardian solely with the truth would be very foolish indeed.
Re:I know this isn't the point.... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:I know this isn't the point.... (Score:3, Interesting)
It is registered as supporting the Labour Party.
[Citation needed]
The core purpose [gmgplc.co.uk] of the Trust that owns the paper is "To secure the financial and editorial independence of The Guardian in perpetuity: as a quality national newspaper without party affiliation"
Labour Party members, or supporters. I doubt very much anyone else reads the Guardian
Now you're just being ridiculous. It's a broadly leftist paper, yes, but Labour aren't the only leftists in town politically... in fact arguably they're not even leftist at all ;)
So tbh I would say the contemporary stereotype of a Guardian reader would be closer to a Lib Dem or Green voter.
they are the Government's lone supportive voice
I doubt very much you read the Guardian, based on that claim. Pretty laughable considering how much criticism they have published over the years.
Disclosure/disclaimer: yes, I read the Guardian often, and of the major papers I would say it's probably the best... but please don't assume I am a simple fanboy who trusts them soley with the truth. I frequently mix and match with other papers and of course other sources from other media.