Meanwhile, Block Communication Incorporated was quoted at the Washington Post last night:
In a statement sent late on Thursday, Block Communications said the union’s depiction of Saturday night’s confrontation was incorrect. “Last Saturday evening, the Publisher of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette expressed his frustration to the newsroom staff about several issues of concern to him. We have conducted a review of all information available, and we disagree with the characterization of Saturday evening’s events as expressed by the Newspaper Guild. No one in the newsroom was physically threatened contrary to published reports ... The Publisher expresses his sincere regrets over his conduct that evening and did not intend his actions to upset anyone.”You can read the entire statement, along with Jonathan Silver's response:
Via the tweet thread, it's evident that there's more video.Well, BCI is putting out the trash again today. Here is the latest nonsense from a company that has no regard for its employees and continues to forget that it can’t pull the wool over the eyes of people dedicated to the truth.— Jonathan Silver (@jsilverinpgh) February 15, 2019
@PGNewsGuild will respond shortly. pic.twitter.com/QCHtn6fmin
If I can find it, I'll post it.
4 comments:
This violates the PA wiretapping and eavesdropping law 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5703(1).
PA is a 2 party consent state and John R. Block is not a public figure with no expectation of privacy.
Ol F,
Fields v. City of Philadelphia does not apply to this video.
https://www.aclupa.org/our-work/legal/legaldocket/fields-v-city-philadelphia
You're an idiot. The building has security cameras, which Block should have remembered, except for his drunkenness. No legal expectation of privacy.
Man, you're a numbskull!
This was recorded without his consent on a cell phone not a security camera.
Most security cameras do not have audio.
Were there any security cameras in that room. Not the public areas of the building.
Post a Comment