Quotes About Information

I come from a culture where the pub is the centre of the community. The pub is the Internet. It's where information is gathered, collated and addressed.

An absence of credible information prevents citizens from participating in public decision-making, particularly on key issues of concern such as education, health, and governance.

Let me make the Workers' Party's position clear: When we deal with public discourse, I think it's very helpful, in fact it's critical, that we all deal with objective information.

Fahrenheit 9/11 took public domain information that should have been on the news every night and put it in a film that a lot of people went to see. But still Bush has never had to answer those charges.

Well-reported news is a public good; bad news is bad for everyone.

I accept you need the right balance, people do need to know their privacy is protected, but when it's essential information which will be dealt with by security agencies... I do feel the public interest overrides that.

In America there is a public library in every community. How many public libraries are there in Africa? Every day there are new books coming out and new ideas being discussed. But these new books and ideas don't reach Africa and we are being left behind.

You cannot have Rwanda again because information would come out far more quickly about what is actually going on, and the public opinion would grow to the point where action would need to be taken.

An important reason that we're in the trouble we are in with climate change is that we don't have a handle on our environment. We form public policy based on information that is wrong.

They still have negligent auditing, they still have things going for a walk, and they have no idea where they're coming from, and they have no idea where they're going. And if that's the case, how can we, as the public, trust the NSA with all of our information, with all of our private records, the permanent record of our lives?

I believe the classified section of a newspaper - especially the 'Business Opportunities' column - can tell you more about your city 'business-wise' than any other publication.

A President of the United States cannot restrain anything from publication.

One's head is finite. You pour more and more things into it - surnames, chronologies, affiliations - and it packs them away in its tunnels, and eventually you find that you have a book about something that you publish.

The problem is that with blogging, the model is publish first, maybe fact-check later. In newspapers, the model is you fact check first and then publish. But those models are merging.

If you want to publish data, you should do it to share knowledge.

The world's entire scientific and cultural heritage, published over centuries in books and journals, is increasingly being digitized and locked up by a handful of private corporations.

Once a discovery has been published, there is no way of un-publishing it.

I'm not convinced that every secret has to be published. I think there are secrets worth keeping, and I think there are secrets not worth keeping.

In a world where everyone is a publisher, no one is an editor. And that is the danger that we face today.

Science should belong to scientists and not the publishers.

More and more readers are finding important and interesting content through platforms like Facebook, Twitter, and now Medium rather than traditional publishers.

Yes, the world is now flat for publishing as well.

I think the search engines are the new equivalent of publishing: an enabler of information.

Well, the Internet is this miracle. It is an absolutely extraordinary idea that you can press a send button, and you are publishing to the world.