A secret investigation of news leaks at Hewlett-Packard was more elaborate than previously reported, and almost from the start involved the illicit gathering of private phone records and direct surveillance of board members and journalists, according to people briefed on the company’s review of the operation.
HP Spying More Elaborate Than Reported
About The Author
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
2006-09-18 7:06 pmSphinx
Great concept, those parachutes wouldn’t be anywhere near so golden with that in place.
This is what happens when Big Companies outsource to contractors who then subcontract. The same sorts of stuffups happen right across the government sector, both here and in the US — big surprise that HP has fallen victim to it as well.
2006-09-18 2:00 pmgpierce
I think you might be overlooking the possibility–actually high likelihood–that this is contracted and then subcontracted to distance those who are ordering the espionage from the unsavory and illegal activities of those who actually have to do the work. It affords a certain deniability. If the same had happened at a lower profile company and to someone with less power this would never have come to light, and the accusations of illegality would have been dismissed and the contractors richly rewarded.
It’d be nice if they’d be consistent.
Like for example, for three years we heard about how bad it was about the “leak” of one Mrs Plame. When we find out that the “leaker” isn’t one of the media’s political enemies, the media suddenly drops the scandal. No longer interested.
So if the media is going to be partisan, why would I listen?
Just like how you don’t go to Fox for objective news about democrats, you don’t go to NYT, ABC, CBS, CNN, and the rest for objective news about conservatives, republicans, and yes…. corporations.
Because you aren’t going to find it. It’s all agenda.
2006-09-18 2:00 pmSeth Quarrier
Off topic but just because FOX is blatantly pro right, doesn’t mean that it is objective about the right. Rather they clearly have one agenda which is to promote the right wing of this country. CNN et al. are much more moderate and are willing to say good and bad things about both parties. Objective news on a movement will never come from that movement or FOX News. Not that CNN couldn’t use a lot of work (as it has a definite right wing bias as well)
2006-09-18 2:46 pmhalfmanhalfamazing
I don’t see it as off topic at all because look at the source. The NY Times……. they put out propaganda on a regular basis. You won’t see Fox sourced here on OSN, why should left wing news be sourced here either? Because they’ve got a long/old establishment?
A media source which has a political agenda is not to be trusted.
And CNN is not right wing. They regularly carry the water for left wing causes, as does the majority of the media.
2006-09-18 3:07 pmDnsMan
Couldn’t agree more.
Case in point, look how fast the Carl Rove fiasco disappeared from CNN once it came out that Rove wasn’t the leaker and Armitage was. The facts didn’t match their agenda, so the news coverage of this story died away.
Then many of us watch and wonder at how a population can become so polarized and full of hate and spite. Journalism is dead anymore, at least real journalism. CNN, et al should be utterly ashamed of what they’ve done to taint so much of the population, but we clearly see (by their own actions) they have no shame, no conscious, no moral standing, anything for a story that fits their agenda and the hell with the facts.
Luckily I think the tide has turned, most folks I talk to anymore are just turning it all of and getting on with their lives versus getting all excited and upset over the eternal “crisis of the day” propaganda.
I have a friend that has an excellent tag line on his emails, goes something like:
“Medical professionals are growing increasingly alarmed by the increase in depression cases. May I suggest a simple solution? Turn off the damn TV, put the newspaper where it belongs (garbage can), and get out and live your life for a change.”
2006-09-18 3:15 pmhalfmanhalfamazing
——–Case in point, look how fast the Carl Rove fiasco disappeared from CNN once it came out that Rove wasn’t the leaker and Armitage was.———
It wasn’t just CNN that the story disappeared from. It disappeared from what seems to be the entire media organ.
So much for that scandal.
And it’s also worth noting that the rumors of Karl Rove being indicted first came out of that ultra left wing blog, truthout.org. That’s something I do every now and then is browse the leftist blogs.
It’s a good way to know what the lib media will be talking about in a day or three.
These people are so unethical it should sicken everybody. And the NYT is arguably the head of the snake.
2006-09-18 4:14 pmDnsMan
Ah, refreshing to see that there are still a few conservative leaning folks in IT out there 😉 Hey nothing against the liberals, diverse thinking is a good thing. We just dearly need to get beyond letting it get so personal and divisive.
As Tom Selleck once said:
“It’s not that conservatives don’t care. We do. We just have different answers than liberals do. It’s a difference of the mind, not of the heart.”
Of course, there are folks that take it too far on both sides.
Agree 100% on ethics training, but a lot of the problem starts at the top of these organizations. I’m sure there are a lot of POTENTIALLY GOOD JOURNALISTS out there, but they are not allowed to be journalists (personally I’d find another career, but can sympathise SOMEWHAT) by the organizational agenda dictated down from above.
After going back to college, it’s pretty clear where a lot of this radical and near radical left thinking is coming from. All these young kids see and hear at school is heavily to extremely left slanted, frighteningly so at times. No surprise when they turn out the way the do and it only makes them more susceptable to the leftist media! Can’t be any surprise that we turn out the type of journalists we wind up with. And here I’m paying good money to listen to spin and propaganda, double ouch.
Back on topic. We’d be kidding ourselves if we think that HP is the only one doing this stuff. Not advocating breaking out the tin foil hats, but just a bit of realization that HP just got caught this time.
2006-09-18 5:29 pmtomcat
Curiously, nobody seems to be asking, “Did HP have a good reason to want to know what board members were saying to the media?” I know that what I’m going to say is pretty contrarian but … I DO think that HP had good reason to want to know who was leaking information to the media. Board members are supposed to represent the interests of the company and shareholders. When board members actively undermine their company, they shouldn’t be “serving” on the board anymore. Granted, I’m not talking about a board member exposing corruption or trying to seek positive restructuring of the company by talking to the media. But it appears in this case that one or more board members was working against the interests of the company. I can at least understand the motivation of the top board members in rooting out the culprit. So, in my view, the real scandal here isn’t the fact that HP wanted to find out the leaker(s) but, rather, how they went about doing it. I would assert that there were probably better (legal) ways of finding the culprit (ie. compartmentalizing some information disclosures to the board and determining who leaks what).
As for the media, they don’t care about ‘dog bites man’ stories. They sell sensationalism, conflict, greed, and wrongdoing. They love scandals, cover-ups, and malfeasance. It’s in their DNA.
2006-09-19 1:59 amhalfmanhalfamazing
———Curiously, nobody seems to be asking, “Did HP have a good reason to want to know what board members were saying to the media?”———–
If the source were Foxnews, could you bring yourself to look past it?
I have to say that for the most part, I agree with you. But leaking has become so common in the past few years that it’s gotten to the point that it depends on who and what you are leaking about. If it’s a leak that the media approves of, they themselves will lionize the leaker and characterize them as a whistle blower. And…. again, the plame case….. They for the longest time thought they could take down (part of)the admin so they characterized it as an evil leak. Now that they find out it was Armitage, the leak isn’t so evil.
———–As for the media, they don’t care about ‘dog bites man’ stories. They sell sensationalism, conflict, greed, and wrongdoing. They love scandals, cover-ups, and malfeasance. It’s in their DNA.———-
If they loved scandal they’d still be on the case of who leaked valerie plame. Now that they found out that it’s one of their own, an anti war guy, they’ll sell any excuse they can in order to not scandalize the guy. He’s one of their allies.
Investigation. That’s not what journalists do.
2006-09-19 1:47 amhalfmanhalfamazing
———Ah, refreshing to see that there are still a few conservative leaning folks in IT out there———-
And to top that off I’m a full time linux user! lol
———–I’m sure there are a lot of POTENTIALLY GOOD JOURNALISTS out there, but they are not allowed to be journalists by the organizational agenda dictated down from above. ———–
I totally agree. That’s what makes it so funny when people throw up the red herring of “the corporate media”. Corporate and conservative are not synonymous. Just ask opensecrets.org. These organizations are lockstep….. and it isn’t to the right.
———-Back on topic. We’d be kidding ourselves if we think that HP is the only one doing this stuff.———
Yeah, well………. It’s hard to accept the premise and “the facts” when the source is one which is so often discreditted, and is so blatantly partisan.
I’m sure that other corporations are doing this. And that’s exactly what the NY Times wants. Paint them with a broad brush, they’re all evil.
2006-09-18 5:04 pmmonodeldiablo
Here’s an alternative to actively ignoring the rest of the world outside your particular sphere: get news from *multiple* sources, identify issues that might be hyped and use a little critical thinking when reading or watching.
If everyone thought logically about pressing issues and critically about where they get their news from we might even have informed debate, as opposed to the outright partisan bickering on the news, the street and this site.
2006-09-18 3:14 pmAdurbe
All media has a political slant, its human nature
the bbc is a government quango, but I still trust it as a impartial (non govenment dictated) news service
p.s. for anyone who doesnt know what a quango is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quango
2006-09-18 3:17 pmhalfmanhalfamazing
The BBC has alot of anti-americanism in it. So does the UK Guardian.
———All media has a political slant, its human nature———-
I agree with you totally. But the liberal media should just come out and state what it is that we already know.
“we’re in the tank for democrats”
And for that matter, Fox should also do the same.
“we’re in the tank for republicans”
I do tire of the shilling.
2006-09-18 2:50 pmDnsMan
Nothing new here, been going on in Corporate and Government circles/agencies for years and probably always will, HP just got caught.
I find it hillarious how upset people get over this stuff. 99% of these same folks think nothing of chatting away on a cordless or cell phone that can be monitored (very hard to detect passive monitoring) by all their neighbors, run open and unencrypted wifi at their homes, think nothing of the privacy issues of using a public wifi access point (unencrypted of course), will give out tons of unneccessary info to get a product or service, and so on. Little less emotion and a bit more balanced thinking would do the world a lot of good.
Now onto the comments
“CNN et al. are much more moderate and are willing to say good and bad things about both parties.”
“Not that CNN couldn’t use a lot of work (as it has a definite right wing bias as well)”
I laughed so hard I nearly wet myself after reading that! Who do you think your kidding, even the polls don’t agree with that. CNN et all is about as liberal of a network as they come. Hey, real journalism is dead in this world anymore, they all have a slant one way or the other, some more than others. With the majority of the media in the US leanin strongly left, it’s actually a good thing that FOX leans right, helps balance things out…especially since FOX is eating CNN’s lunch anymore in the ratings.
Maybe there’s a reason folks are leaving CNN (et al) for FOX, they’re tired of the liberal propaganda/spin spewing strongly (and obviously) left leaning mainstream media in this country and they’re looking for the other side of the story, even if it does have a conservative edge to it. A trend that isn’t going to change anytime soon as people are fed up with CNN, LA Times, NY Times, ABC, CBS, NBC, and so on. The liberal media will never learn as they can’t admit that they even have the problem, so FOX will continue to eat their lunch for them.
Just my two cents worth.
2006-09-18 4:29 pmprogster
actually as a european, I believe I have a more objective view (the left actual exists here for instance, but lets not go into that ) and must say that most US press is quite right wing. Claiming CNN is left wing is a joke to me.
Now back on topic!
2006-09-19 1:50 amhalfmanhalfamazing
——–I believe I have a more objective view———–
I was willing to give you the benefit of the doubt until you said this………..
———Claiming CNN is left wing is a joke to me.———
Nobody’s “claiming” that they’re left wing. We’re pointing it out.
Imagine that, from a company that secretly encodes little yellow dots in my color laserjet output, how out of character. b-;
hmmm, Actually, compare the democrats of america to almost any european country, and they look more like a right-wing party.
In America we have a right wing party and a far right wing party, (democrats and republicans respectively).
All of the media isn’t corporate-oriented because of a party-orientation. It is because News is apart of Media Conglomerates that fight for money and wealth instead of “the best news possible (objective, naturally)”
So any news station out there will report news spun towards big business, from Fox to CNN. It is the nature of a capitalized news industry.
Luckily, things like OSN (:D) and blogs and the internet have the power of fighting it.
2006-09-18 3:12 pmhalfmanhalfamazing
——–So any news station out there will report news spun towards big business, from Fox to CNN. It is the nature of a capitalized news industry.———–
That’s false. The media is not capitalist.
If they were capitalist they’d have fired Dan Rather a decade ago. Because of him CBS was in third place for a very long time.
Their agenda is what’s important to them, not money.
2006-09-18 5:33 pmtomcat
I agree. The liberal old guard media titans don’t like the fact that they no longer control the choke points of information disclosure. And they aren’t going down easily. CBS will carry Katie Couric for years and bleed money like a sieve — but none of that matters, because CBS is the house organ for the DNC. Thank God for talk radio, Fox News, and the Internet.
2006-09-19 1:42 amhalfmanhalfamazing
Edited 2006-09-19 02:00
2006-09-18 7:04 pmSphinx
Yeah, must have been Dan keeping them in third, funny how they’re right back in third after the one week, “let’s tune in and see if Katie screws up”, bounce. Their ratings couldn’t possibly have anything to do with their shoveling the same old tired crap formula programming.
HP would be in deep shit.
Monitoring private communications breaks European human rights law.
2006-09-18 5:35 pmtomcat
Monitoring private communications breaks European human rights law.
Yeah, but obviously if it’s a Democrat monitoring an evil Republican, then it must have been done in good conscience Because we all know that Gingrich deserved to have his cell phone calls recorded and handed over to Congressional ideologues. /cough
Given the scandals of Enron, MCI WorldCom, etc, perhaps
its time to enact term limits on corporate board members.