Well, that’s journalists looked after.
Once they discovered, almost too late, that data retention posed a significant threat to one of the core aspects of journalism, Australia’s media have spent the last 10 days up in arms about mass surveillance, after, with one or two exceptions, ignoring the issue for the last three years.
Journalists will be protected from having their metadata examined in order to identify their sources by a special warrant involving a “public interest advocate”. But what about lawyers? Where’s their protection? What about doctors? For that matter, what about ordinary Australians? The media, apparently, isn’t interested in anyone else but itself.
The journalism information warrant is a good idea. So good, it should be extended, to everyone. If the government wants our data — anyone’s data — get a damn warrant.
Regarding the protection of the metadata of journalists – of which I am one – seems to completely miss the point. If authorities can still check the metadata of everyone else, it surely makes it possible to see who has been contacting journalists, rather than the other way around. Okay, that’s quite a bit of data to trawl through, but since the NSA’s supercomputers at Fort Meade and those of GCHQ are searching through trillions of calls and emails vacuumed up by satellites under the Echelon program every day, it’s a problem that can be overcome.
I see all of this as yet another step in the direction of a police state, along with barely commented upon measures such as now arming Immigration officials at airports. For what purpose? In any other country there would be screams of rage, but to say anything here means one is open to that most terrible of insults: being unAustralian.
Get a warrant to *begin* collecting metadata for a mandated period.
This is a bigger problem than the journalists have realised, I suspect.
Whereas in the past the journalist could protect his/her source even at the risk of going to gaol, this is now gone by this legislation. The journalist won’t have to give the source up, the metadata will.
Any source to a journalist now has to be by non-electronic means, unless you are willing to place your life in the hands of the public advocate. I know I wouldn’t.
As for the rest of Australian indeed. No member of society should have their metadata accessible to Inspector Plod without a warrant, and a public advocate, inspecting the request beforehand.
OK, KymB has clearly understood the implications. He was typing as I was and got his comment up before me.
Cheers to you KymB, this is exactly the problem.
“Viva The Age of Entitlement!”
Bought off with scraps from the government table – they can continue to edit what we get to see – we’ll just have to continue to look after ourselves.