AFP accessed journalists' metadata
The Australian Federal Police (AFP) used their powers granted during investigations to access the metadata from journalists' phones almost 60 times during the past year. Names of the targeted journalists haven't been released, nor have reasons for the information being sought.
This latest information adds to the recent debate regarding the balance between national security and media freedom as it was revealed on Monday that the AFP seized travel details of the ABC's Dan Oakes from Qantas.
Dan Oakes was one of two journalists who broke the Afghan Files; a story which revealed allegations of unlawful killings by Australian special forces in Afghanistan.
What do you think? Should there be room for freedom of the press and whistleblowers? Or should the AFP be cracking down on reported leaks?
One of the main principles of a good democracy is the public’s right to know what’s going on. Journalists do need room to move, but they also have to understand to what extent and under the law they can maintain the anonymity of a source. As most of us are aware, journalists get their information from a variety of informants and not all of these people are above board. Some very questionable characters give tip offs to journalists and the question is.. could a journalist be inadvertently “protecting” a criminal?
Personally I think journalists need to be clearer about the type of person they are working with and I am in favour of the system in Canada whereby the protection of sources is argued on a case-by-case basis.
As for whistleblowers, if they break the law it should be dealt with, but here again, a case by case basis should be applied. In my opinion, there’s a great difference between leaking information about a private company or organisation..and.. compromising the security of the country by leaking classified information.
More bad things are happening from cover-ups than showing the public the facts.
When everything is a security issue and everything is classified, you know there is a cover-up.
Whoever makes the decision to dump the load in the right place will suffer the obligatory dragging through the mud, at great expense, by those who know the secrets.
Establish a clearinghouse, The Bureau of Public Secrets.
Hang on, while government loves duplication, we already have one.
It is called 'The Press' or 'The Media'
Everyone do your job as ethically as possible.
A current issue is that politicians of all shades do not like to have their dirty linen exposed. They try to operate under a cloak of secrecy, e.g.who is contributing to re-election funds. It is a favourite trick to declare all documents to be classified thus not releasing their contents to the public.
The resistance to a proper ICAC type body is quite obvious and without that journalists are really our only source of what is really happening and in turn they rely on whistleblowers to feed them the information. Do not be fooled as often the source of information is coming from politicians themslevles as they push their own ulterior motives.
This is a critical issue at this time as so much is being done to shut down the public's access to what is really going on and the government is guilty of an overeach in the guise of National Security. Etenrnal vigilance is the price of freedom and our freedom is being encroached upon.
All we are hearing about this case is a one-sided view by the media. We are not being given any information to support what the AFP has done, and is continuing to do. The media is jumping up and down about the right to expose cover-ups and in so doing are covering up half of the story by not allowing the AFP or the government equal space. I believe that the AFP is trying to plug a hole, not gain proof to send a journalist to gaol.
I have no issue with a journalist making public confidential information nor do I believe that a journalist should be required to reveal their sources. What I have issue with is the information and how it relates to national security. I wonder what a journalist would do if faced with the choice of revealing highly confidential information that could compromise national security or would likely win them a Walkley Award. In any race self interest is always the front runner.
Spot on with Self Interest being the front runner and as we have seen it certainly is with most politicians.
So those naughty journalists are at it again? Exposing gov.s secrets. Obviously the AFP has nothing better to do, no more drugs being smuggled and no more jihadis or other threat to chase or crims being allowed into our borders.
So lets go after journos since our masters don't want their secrets exposed.As far as I am concerned gov should not be allowed to have ANY secrets from the public regardless. They can't be trusted to look after the countrys best interest ahead of thier own anyway.
Who cares!
If the AFP are running an investigation they should be able to access any information that they think may be of use/interest.
They are welcome to mine at any time but then I have nothing to hide.
we aren't talking about criminal gangs, drug cartel etc, we are talking about law abiding journalists who are there rightly informing the public on what we, as the public, have every right to know.
There is no reason at all to access a journalists or anybody elses metadata with first informing them with a copy of a court order & a time frame for that person to get legal advice etc.
Just because you have nothing to hide doesn't give this thug government the right to do whatever they please.
Use an overseas VPN so your metadata data is fully encripted & they have far less chance of being made to comply with Australian legislation by the worst thug government in Australia's history
OandW, and others, what is this 'right to know' you bang on about. There are many reasons that there is no right-to-know for instance national security, commercial sensitivity (such as when the government is granted access to other peoples intellectual property), criminal investigations (where publication may compromise other peoples right to a fair trial), the identification of juvenile or children offenders or victims, our individual tax affairs plus other issues I cannot think of right now.
The media are banging on about 'press freedom', what they really mean is freedom to publish whatever they want without regard to the effect on other people. They would like to be able to defame persons with impunity. I hope the 'media' do not win their demands and are still held to account for their conduct as are other sections of the population.
As far as I am aware the 'raids' on the ABC and News ltd were about gathering evidence for a criminal investigation. Whoever 'leaked' the information appear to have contravened the law of the land, if you want change then lobby for changes to the law.
Espionage or spying is defined as obtaining confidential information without the owners permission. If there was a criminal act committed by members of the ADF then the matter should have been addressed with the federal senate for their enquiry before running to a journalist with stolen confidential documents and going public. Not doing so is a rampant abuse of the meaning of freedom of the press and it's criminal.
Although many people think George Orwell was writing about communism in '1984' and 'Animal Farm', he based these novels on his experiences in the British public service, and its potential for totalitarianism. The Australian government is following the same script, declaring itself to be democratic while covertly removing freedoms at every opportunity. The raids by the AFP can only be seen as an exercise of the power of the state and an attack on the right of the employers of these public servants to know what is going on in their name. As an ex-cop and 'security' man, don't expect Peter Dutton to support people who uncover wrongdoing. Government policy is obfuscation and 'shoot the messenger'. It's all about power, spinning lies, and covering up what's really going on. Remember 'children overboard', Nauru, Manus Island. If Australians cannot see the similarities between the Australian government and the actions of the Hong Kong government, then we are in for a bleak, undemocratic future.
The AFP was granted the right to delete and change content - that equates to destruction of evidence.
It is about intimidating whisleblowers and anyone else who may help reveal dirty secrets.
Why should the media have any rights or special privileges beyond that of ordinary(sic) citizens ? Particularly where interfering in a citizen's private life is concerned?
Rather than BS everyone and sook-off about scrutiny by police, the media should be looking to clean up their own act and do ing some proper investigative journalism for a change rather than 'borrowing' the work of others and not even bothering to cite the source.
Ethics in journalism? What a laugh! There are the people who would show revealing photos of women in distress and give oxygen to absolute tripe from Twitter.
Totally agree LJ
To take it further ..we are being run by fake news from the media.
So how many people remember the Levison inquiry after the blatant 'freedom of the press' rampant criminal abuses by Murdoch's World News in UK tapping into ctizen's, politicians and the royalty private mobile phone conversations in addition to bribery of the police?
All freedoms are limted by legislated laws. Journalists are not above the laws and AFP have a right to investigate any suspected breach of laws and associated criminal activity whether that includes raids of businesses, private homes and documents related to travel , banking, investments and other financial transactions.
Dealing with stolen confidential documents whether they belong to a private citizen or government entity is a crime.
So what some posters on here are saying is it's ok for the government to keep secret everything they do under the guise of national security or privacy or other legislation which muzzle the media etc & allow government departments free & total access to the personal lives of it's citizens just like Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Ex USSR, East Germany & currently China with Xi Jinping ruling until his death, Putin. There are many more examples
Freedom of the press has to be protected at ALL costs & if our government is guilty of wrong doing, we the people who elect this government have every right to know, every right.
Who leaks the data to the Journalists in the first place? Accessing private data should be classed as spying. I suppose all countries have done it and will continue to do so. Unless there is a legal reason it should not happen without a court order.