‘The Australian Federal Police has this week conducted two high-profile raids on journalists who have exposed government secrets and their sources. On Tuesday, seven AFP officers spent several hours searching News Corp journalist Annika Smethurst’s Canberra home, her mobile phone and computer. The AFP linked the raid to “the alleged publishing of information classified as an official secret”.
‘This stemmed from Smethurst’s 2018 article, which contained images of a “top secret” memo and reported that senior government officials were considering moves to empower the Australian Signals Directorate (ASD) to covertly monitor Australian citizens for the first time.
‘Soon after, 2GB Radio Presenter Ben Fordham revealed he had been notified by the Department of Home Affairs that he was the subject of a similar investigation, aimed at identifying the source of classified information he had reported regarding intercepted boat arrivals.
‘And then on Wednesday, the AFP raided the ABC’s Sydney headquarters. This dramatic development was in connection with the 2017 “Afghan files” report based on “hundreds of pages of secret defence force documents leaked to the ABC”. These documents revealed disturbing allegations of misconduct by Australian special forces.
‘… One of the most disturbing outcomes is not prosecutions or even the raids themselves, but the chilling of public interest journalism. Sources are less likely to come forward, facing risk to themselves and a high likelihood of identification by government agencies. And journalists are less likely to run stories, knowing the risks posed to their sources and perhaps even to themselves.
‘Against this background, the calls for a Media Freedom Act, such as by the Alliance for Journalists’ Freedom, have gained significant traction. It may take this kind of bold statement to cut across the complexities of individual laws and both recognise and protect the basic freedom of the press and the future of public interest journalism in Australia.’
- Why the raids on Australian media present a clear threat to democracy »
- Media raids raise questions about AFP’s power and weak protection for journalists and whistleblowers »
- Kerry O’Brien says AFP raids on the ABC and Annika Smethurst ‘go to the heart of democracy’ »
- The raid on the ABC shows we need a law to protect journalists and their sources »
- Press raids are proof Australians deserve more scrutiny of their government, not less »
- What do the AFP raids on the media mean for journalists and their sources? »
- Morrison and Albanese to discuss inquiry into press freedom »
- Parliamentary press freedom inquiry: letting the fox guard the henhouse »
- Australia’s culture of secrecy has built a complex web that hampers press freedom »
- The Coalition is calling for religious freedom – so why has it forsaken the media’s? »
- Australians are less interested in news and consume less of it compared to other countries, survey finds »
- Australian governments have long been hostile to media freedom. That’s unlikely to change any time soon »
- Court ruling against ABC highlights the enormous deficiency in laws protecting journalists’ sources »
- It’s time for the government to walk the talk on media freedom in Australia »
- Journalists must be protected in police investigations. Here’s our five point plan for reform »
To protect press freedom, we need more public outrage – and an overhaul of our laws
Peter Greste writes in The Conversation (8.6.19) that, after this week’s police raids on media outlets, we need a better way to balance two crucial elements of our democracy – national security and press freedom.
‘A few days ago, Waleed Aly asked a not-so-rhetorical question in The Sydney Morning Herald. He wondered how many Australians were worried about the fact that the Australian Federal Police had spent a good portion of this week raiding the offices and homes of journalists who’ve published stories clearly in the public interest.
‘His conclusion? Not many. He went on to argue that it is because we have developed a culture of accepting excessive state power, with no real thought about the consequences for civil liberties or the functioning of our democracy.
‘Sadly, I would have to agree with Aly, but as with so many surveys, the answer you get depends on the question you ask.
‘What if we asked, “Hands up who feels comfortable with relying on the Facebook posts and Twitter feeds of our politicians and departmental spokespeople for information about what our government is up to? Who thinks that is a good way to run a democracy?” Then, I bet you’d get a very different answer.’
- To protect press freedom, we need more public outrage – and an overhaul of our laws »
- Four laws that need urgent reform to protect both national security and press freedom »
- Grattan on Friday: Media freedom joins the current ‘freedoms’ agenda »
- Press, platforms and power: mapping out a stronger Australian media landscape »
- Media chiefs unite on press freedom, but will it result in any action? »
- Explainer: what are the media companies’ challenges to the AFP raids about? »
- Kerry O’Brien defends the ABC and calls out media ‘failures’ in impassioned Logies speech »
- The AFP is at a crossroads, and Peter Dutton’s ‘old school’ style isn’t what it needs »
- Why investigative reporting in the digital age is waving, not drowning »
- Why an Australian charter of rights is a matter of national urgency »
- Any prosecution of journalists for national security offences to require attorney-general’s approval »
- Australia needs a Media Freedom Act. Here’s how it could work »
- When Trump attacks the press, he attacks the American people and their Constitution »
- Security committee recommends bare minimum of reform to protect press freedom »
- Albanese wants to change the way politics is done. This means the way politics is reported will have to change too »
- Australia’s secrecy laws include 875 offences. Reforms are welcome, but don’t go far enough for press freedom