Here on WordPress(.com) it is possible to set up a Google webmaster tools (the verification code can be entered in tools->all tools->WebMaster tools. there is also Bing and Yahoo but no one cares). The most interesting part of this is the ‘impressions’ data, which tells you how many times your site has shown up in a search result. Apparently I usually get about 800 impressions a day, for various things, most of which my blog is not really appropriate for. For example over the last month I have had 400 impressions for “Fallout new vegas nude” and another 70 for ‘nudity’ instead. I’ll get even more now I’ve actually used the phrase.
So I usually get ~800 per day. But since I posted a few pictures of Rebekah Brooks (yum), check out my graph:
You will notice that of the 8000 search results I showed up in, only 16 people actually clicked me. This is rather pathetic.
Anyway, in case you have forgotten, this is what she looks like:
It is exciting just how much apathy this whole story has drummed up. I am staunchly opposed to Rupert Murdoch in every way possible yet I can’t claim to want to see his empire crumble because of this. It’s just not *right*. It’s not right that a newspaper has had to close because of it. It was one of the most widely read newspapers in the UK. It was utter drivel, but it’s not right it’s suddenly vanished for no good reason, it is not fair to the readers (please note absence of snide comment). I can’t honestly believe that Murdoch and son were so involved in the day to day running of one of their many companies that they could reasonably be expected to be intimately familiar with the modus operandi of their journalists, so I can’t feel the hate towards them. Rebekah Brooks must almost certainly have known what was going on, but I’d be really really sad if she ended up in jail for it, and not just because I fancy her.
If the hacking really was rife, as it has been claimed, then I can’t see how it makes sense to prosecute anyone: any newspaper not doing it would be at a disadvantage economically. The system was broken, but picking on the few people who got caught just isn’t *right*. The system is/was fundamentally broken, but that is not something that can be attributed to a few individuals.
It is like with the MP’s expenses thing. They got away with a lot of stuff because their environment allowed them to and everyone else was doing it. Then all of a sudden it wasn’t okay and a few people retroactively got punished for it. The key word is retroactive: it is very nearly that the rules suddenly changed and they were held to the new ones. The old rules were in place of course, but they weren’t enforced or respected, and there was instead a gentleman’s agreement on what was acceptable. It is appropriate at this time to bring in some new rules, reform the system, and say “look chaps, these are the rules from now on, and we are going to enforce them, and there will be penalties”. It is not appropriate to start enforcing obsolete failed rules that nobody is following and applying them to past offences. It doesn’t achieve anything and it fucks people’s lives up, and at a basic level, it is simply not fair.
This has partly happened because The Guardian was out to get Murdoch. And I like the Guardian and I don’t like Murdoch, but wait a minute, I don’t think they should be the arbiters of justice.