3 ms·

To be fair, 1993 is a long time ago. Today, even Menwith Hill and 'the secret nuclear bunker' are on Google Earth. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1993 https://e

by dazc 11y ago

To be fair, 1993 is a long time ago. Today, even Menwith Hill and 'the secret nuclear bunker' are on Google Earth. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1993 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1993 1993 is the year bookmakers cut their odds on the monarchy being abolished by the year 2000 from 100/to 1 to 50/1 New Teletext service on ITV and Channel 4 Ford unveils its new Mondeo Unemployment is still just short of the 3,000,000 (no real change there then?) and The Bank of England lowers interest rates to 6% Not having a go, just interesting what was also going back then.

vidarh 11y ago
That's true. But since the BT Tower was built, the Official Secrets Act has gotten stricter, not more lenient (e.g. in the 80's the previous public interest defence was removed). That they've given up on restricting knowledge about buildings that are in plain view reduces the comedy effect somewhat, but they still have occasionally made idiotic attempts to restrict information that's already public. E.g. in 2004, a government source leaked a document purporting to show that Bush discussed plans with Blair to bomb Al Jazeera, and eventually it got into the hands of Daily Mirror who put it on their front page. Government officials subsequently tried to threaten the other national papers with the Official Secrets Act if they republished the information (it didn't work; the papers ignored the threats). I'm sure the overall level of idiocy in this respect has fallen as they've come to terms with a reality where trying to restrict information like this just makes things worse, but it's not because they wouldn't like to.
- dazc 11y ago
  Yup, overall, agree with the sentiment.
- moomin 11y ago
  For those interested, the reason the Official Secrets Act removed the public interest defence was that someone successfully used it. (Clive Ponting disclosed details of the sinking of the Belgrano, an hugely controversial action during the Falklands conflict, unanimously acquitted.)
tonyedgecombe 11y ago
You may think it was a long time ago, I can remember it clearly :)

by dazc 11y ago

vidarh 11y ago

That's true. But since the BT Tower was built, the Official Secrets Act has gotten stricter, not more lenient (e.g. in the 80's the previous public interest defence was removed). That they've given up on restricting knowledge about buildings that are in plain view reduces the comedy effect somewhat, but they still have occasionally made idiotic attempts to restrict information that's already public. E.g. in 2004, a government source leaked a document purporting to show that Bush discussed plans with Blair to bomb Al Jazeera, and eventually it got into the hands of Daily Mirror who put it on their front page. Government officials subsequently tried to threaten the other national papers with the Official Secrets Act if they republished the information (it didn't work; the papers ignored the threats). I'm sure the overall level of idiocy in this respect has fallen as they've come to terms with a reality where trying to restrict information like this just makes things worse, but it's not because they wouldn't like to.

dazc 11y ago
Yup, overall, agree with the sentiment.
moomin 11y ago
For those interested, the reason the Official Secrets Act removed the public interest defence was that someone successfully used it. (Clive Ponting disclosed details of the sinking of the Belgrano, an hugely controversial action during the Falklands conflict, unanimously acquitted.)

tonyedgecombe 11y ago

You may think it was a long time ago, I can remember it clearly :)