Wednesday, August 20, 2008

Has Downing Street put anonymous security officer at risk?

The following picture for the Police Bravery Awards was published in the Sun. Note the blacked-out officer.

The next picture is from the Downing Street Flickr album. I have pixelated his face but the linked image on their own Flickr page, along with the one I have saved locally makes him plain to see.

Something tells me that the Sun was requested to black-out this person's face for a reason. Clearly Downing Street 's "uber web team" could not be arsed.
Note: Screenshots of original Flickr image taken before it gets pulled down.

Update: The picture has been pulled by Downing Street from Flickr. Wonder who is going to get fired.


Andy said...
20 Aug 2008 16:42:00  

Makes you wonder why an anonymous security officer would be posing for photographs in the first place.

Does he own a canoe?

Charlie Root said...
20 Aug 2008 16:57:00  

...and presumably for the safety of the security officer you've decided to point it out to a wide audience rather than inform Downing Street quietly.

Well're the real hero.

dizzy said...
20 Aug 2008 17:42:00  

No, I decided to post it because it's another example of how process seems to be non-existant in the Dowing Street web team world.

Barnacle Bill said...
20 Aug 2008 18:02:00  

Don't worry Mr. Root the photo has already been pulled.
Instead of directing your wrath at young Dizzy you might like to e-mail Downing Street asking if they have fired the fool who allowed the photo out in the first place!
As Dizzy points out it is a lack of control/discipline in Downing Street it's self that this incident is just another sad example of.

Anonymous said...
20 Aug 2008 18:49:00  

To be fair, it would have been safer for the individual if Dizzy had taken his snapshots & whatever, reported it to Downing Street on the quiet so they could make things safe and then published his scoop in a day or two. I don't think the impact would have been diluted in any way.

Mostly Ordinary said...
20 Aug 2008 20:02:00  

Actually I think they need a decent content manager as well. The front page has the jokey (and I thought amusing) Clarkson video in the same content box as the UK's condolences for the deaths of 10 French soldiers.


Unsworth said...
20 Aug 2008 20:16:00  

Nobody's going to get fired - let's not get too excited. Since when did anyone in this administration get fired for even the grossest incompetence?

Tankus said...
20 Aug 2008 20:30:00  

wot andy sez ...... not exactly "get smart !"
Maybe hes related to that canoe couple !

Tankus said...
20 Aug 2008 20:36:00  

whoops... meaning to say, what were the two sons occupations .?....
Well I'm not in it anyway's ... double digits or not !

would you like fries with that ?


Alky Ada said...
20 Aug 2008 22:02:00  

How much for the picture Mr Dizzy?

Anonymous said...
20 Aug 2008 22:42:00  

I agree with Andy, if this person wanted to remain incognito why on earth was he standing proud as punch for a group photo that was going to published?


Anonymous said...
20 Aug 2008 22:57:00  

Your assumption that this chap has been blacked-out by the Sun for security reasons is just bizarre and unfounded.

Surely the fact that such an officer posed for what is clearly a publicity photo raises more questions about the competence of the security services than that of Downing St.

Anonymous said...
20 Aug 2008 23:04:00  

He's blind, goddamit, and those are his big glasses. What's the matter with you people?

Bill Quango MP said...
20 Aug 2008 23:56:00  

Surely someone was suspicious when the photographer said

"You five cops hold this big red hula-hoop around this bloke in the middle."

I know would have been.

James said...
21 Aug 2008 00:05:00  

Tut tut, Charlie Root, such naivety. While your approach is the accepted norm for thing like IT security vulnerabilities, this beloved New Labour government operates well outside of "accepted norms". Do you really think that if Dizzy informs No.10 of this - sotto voce - that they will mend their ways and be more rigorous in future? This government and its apparatus will only do the right thing through sustained vociferous opposition and fear of continued public humiliation (10p tax rate, anyone?).

javascript:void said...
21 Aug 2008 00:50:00  

To be fair?

Fair in what use of that word? Or did you slip into thoughtless platitude mode?

Dizzy and the Sun blanked the officer's image, Browno the Clown's little helpers could not be arsed to do this.

It is not Dizzy's fault Browno the Clown has surrounded himself with duffers, fools and idiots, is it?

Anonymous said...
21 Aug 2008 06:22:00  

This makes you the twat. Twat.

Andy said...
21 Aug 2008 06:59:00  

If he published the story after Downing Street pulled the photo, they would have denied it, and he would then have no proof except for the original photo, which he couldn't publish without pixellating the man's face. Which basically destroys his evidence.

The only way that government security will ever improve is for people like Dizzy to keep pointing out when they do something stupid. Keeping quiet about it helps nobody except the lazy government officials and the bad guys.

Invicta said...
21 Aug 2008 09:22:00  

anon @ 22:57 "Your assumption that this chap has been blacked-out by the Sun for security reasons is just bizarre and unfounded."

Why then has Downing Street subsequently pulled the photo?

geoffers said...
21 Aug 2008 11:40:00  

Hi Javascript, I'm the anonymous who said "To be fair". I meant to be fair to Charlie Root's point. It's all very well blaming Broon & co for bringing this into the public domain, but Dizzy did bring it to a wider audience which had the potential to exacerbate the problem. Yes he pixellated the face, but that buys him little because he drew attention to the existence of the unedited version.

He wasn't to know if the photo would get pulled or not and so I think he should have erred on the side of caution instead of rubbing salt in the wound.

As for Andy's suggestion of the possibility of losing the story if Downing Street were prewarned, I have great faith in Dizzy's ability to keep records.

All in all, I just think he made the wrong call this time. That's just my opinion... nobody else has to place any value on it.

According to the word verification, I apparently OUBJ. heh.

jailhouselawyer said...
21 Aug 2008 12:17:00  

The other day I was watching some programme about going under cover to tackle crime on a housing estate. In some shots the van had its number plates and sign writing on its side blurred out, and in others both were clearly visible. I thought this lack of continuity rather defeated the object.

Niccolo Machiavelli said...
21 Aug 2008 16:55:00  

Maybe the copper in question is married to a former diplomat who voiced opposition to some invasion or something...

Anonymous said...
22 Aug 2008 11:04:00  

1 the persons held to be responsible for the photo cock up will be the cleaners or some poor person on a work experience placement or anyone else was never involved in any way,but is too junior to matter and makes an ideal fallguy.

2 subsequent investigation will reveal that the same person(s) were responsible for losing the memory stick containing details of members of the convicted classes

3 a minister will say words to the effect that security has been tightened up and such things cannot happen again (until the next time )and why are we all worried about ID cards and isn't the gcse passrate an truimph and what about gb success at the olympics?

Anonymous said...
17 Aug 2009 12:25:00  

No brave black coppers?
Did the front left hand cop win an eating competition, or is he still there from some obesity initiative, and couldn't get up before the pic was set up? is a participant in the Amazon Europe S.à.r.l. Associates Programme, an affiliate advertising programme designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to