technically, yes. the whole phone hacking scandal can be summarised as users didn't bother reading the instructions manual. it's a pet peeve of mine, when people can't be arsed to read the manual to anything, then go full Karen mode when their appliance bursts into flames bc they didn't read how they shouldn't microwave
tit in plastic containers.
my own parents were highly educated engineers, yet, they would drive me up the pole backwards with their obstinacy to never read a manual, until i said
duck it all and let them have the consequences (which they blamed me for, of course).
edit: also this:
legal it is not, whether you steal a car or an electricity bill. but being cautious is on you
No. That is the ''narrative.''
The desired ''truth.''
It is decided by the media that the end user can't handle the truth.
Otherwise , sources:
A source that provides you information without a name or(external) verification that their anonymity is justified,-is a profiteering liar or a ''plant'' which enables the ''pick up'' by MSM to create a established narrative based on human interest.
But that is a complicated conversation.
So simplified:
Jamie Lowter Pinkerton former SAS can not be classified into ''average Karen that doesn't read the manual'' by default because:
skillset, security understanding, resource availability(surrounded by MET and counter-terrorism units) being a member of Royal Households (high profile targets) etc so that point is wrong.
Same applies to the above for PPOs, other RH employes,government, police, military and similar.
The narrative:
''Stupid individuals'' with high security clearance used default passwords for their voicemails.
The facts of the Goodman/Mulcaire convictions (among others ) are they accessed Vodafone and others to reset the passwords of those individuals to default and then hear the voicemails.
The narrative:
Williams voicemail was actually hacked(instead of Harry's) fails basic logic unless one believes that:
William called his own voicemail to mock Harry in Chelsy's voice on his own voice mail.
Yeah.
The ''freedoms'' alleged by the theory that ''sinister forces'' are trying to cover up the elites even more, by protecting them from press scrutiny are -entertaining, because the press and the dependant politicians are actually engaging in a cover-up under the banner of ''freedom of the press.''
In times of ''freedom of the press'' we got WMDs, we needed Snowdon, the various Papers(Panama etc)Assange, Manning to get information.
The ''free press'' only gave us freedom to...hear lies.(mostly those that validated our world view, ideas, alignments..etc)
Its a wonderfull world.
we were promised light rain today, there's not even a single cloud anywhere! 
he can change my mood in a second 
