![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
onymouson the crucial importance of sources, and how sound journalistic ethics are the keys to freedom of the press.
again, i encourage reading the whole article. and for context, see this previous entry.
https://ethicaljournalismnetwork.org/protecting-sources-keep-journalism-alive
4TH DECEMBER 2019
Protecting the Sources Who Keep Journalism Alive
Aidan White
Journalists can’t be everywhere to witness these events for themselves, so they rely on others to provide them with the facts, eye-witness testimony and insider secrets they need to tell their stories.
These are our sources of information. They are the lifeblood of quality journalism. Reporters may be stylish writers or polished presenters, but what counts most to the public is the reliability of the stories they tell, and that depends on the quality of our sources.
These may be people with their own stories to tell, or who are experts and insiders. They may give us testimony or written reports or confidential documents, even pictures or recordings – all potentially vital in exposing corruption or wrong-doing in public life.
Sometimes people take huge risks to give journalists information that the public needs to know. Edward Snowden, for example, worked with the National Security Agency (NSA) in the United States, and he became a heroic friend of journalism and democracy when he blew the whistle on how the United States government was engaged in a process of mass surveillance across the globe.
Snowden released thousands of documents providing secret information to journalists in the United States and Britain about the scale of the surveillance, including how the NSA was even snooping on the leaders of other countries, by listening to their phone calls.
He became a public enemy in the US and is now a fugitive, living in Moscow. But the information he gave to responsible news media about America’s secret shadowing and interference in global communications has made the world a safer place.
Journalists are always in debt to the heroism of whistle-blowers like Snowden when it comes to exposing the abuse of state power.
the cardinal principle of the journalists’ code – to protect our sources of information. Our union said that this was so important that journalists should be ready to go to jail rather than betray a source, even an anonymous one.
https://ethicaljournalismnetwork.org/ethics-at-source-protecting-the-people-behind-the-stories-that-keep-journalism-alive
Protecting the People Behind the Stories That Keep Journalism Alive
Aidan White
Good sources are the lifeblood of journalism. If there were no people willing to talk to us or answer our questions, journalism could not survive. Journalists may take pride in the eloquence of their storytelling, but even the best reporters know they are only as good as their sources.
Protection of sources is the essential benchmark for ethical journalism; it is critical to creating an environment for watchdog reporting. It ensures people working inside the machines of political or corporate power can feel confident that if they blow the whistle on corruption they will not be victimised.
When protection is weak media report less on the scourge of hypocrisy and double-dealing in public life. Democracy inevitably suffers: government becomes complacent; the rule of law becomes arbitrary; and inequality in society increases.
and
The world may be better connected than ever, but new threats are emerging:
There is increased surveillance and monitoring of people’s communications by the state. Everyone, journalists and their sources included, are tracked and followed – their emails and Internet messages are easily accessible both to state and corporate agencies;
In the new age of terrorism and global criminal networks there is mandatory collection and retention of data, including billions of telephone and email conversations, which is ordered by the state in the name of anti-terrorism, combating corruption, or money-laundering;
The tools we use – mobile devices, smartphones and computers — are tracking devices that can identify who we are talking to and plot where we are at any time. They can be easily accessed by third parties with sophisticated tools with a chilling capacity to uncover our files and track our communications history;
There is less public respect for privacy, widespread abuse of the right to anonymity and fragile legal safeguards because of outdated laws which are more suited to the analogue rather than the digital age.
These issues are highlighted in a recent study conducted by UNESCO. . . .
The preliminary findings of UNESCO study, launched at the World Association of Newspapers conference in Washington on June 2nd, finds that targeting sources triggers cover-ups and destruction of information, with new legal threats and sources of information running dry. Ultimately there is the threat of increased self-censorship.
and
The discussion covered a range of challenges for media including dealing with politically-active insiders with their own axe to grind and people who want to sell information knowing that cash-strapped media will often be ready to pay for exclusives.
They discussed how politically-savvy people can manipulate media with carefully planned leaks and who can make even distinguished journalists look foolish when their cover is blown (Judith Miller, the hapless New York Times reporter who was fed exclusives over weapons of mass destruction and the Iraq war is one victim).
Protecting Sources
On the other hand people may lose their job if they are exposed for telling secrets that reveal corporate sleaze or malpractice. Others risk prosecution or threats to their physical safety for whistle-blowing. Just ask Edward Snowden who exposed the scandal of America’s global spying programme. He remains on the run and is now in exile in Moscow.
Very often sources can be vulnerable people, the victims of people trafficking for instance, or people who are victims of poverty, war and social dislocation. They may need support and guidance so that they don’t unintentionally put themselves further at risk through hasty or ill-judged disclosure.
Good reporters, conscious of their own power, will always protect people against themselves. In today’s world protection of sources has become one of the most urgent battlegrounds for the survival of public interest journalism. (emphasis mine.)
and
More immediate is a question that faces policymakers and judges everywhere as they try to administer legal safeguards for whistle-blowing – just who is a journalist in the age of open information? And who, therefore, is entitled to legal protection over the protection of sources?
The UNESCO study referred to earlier also makes the point that “acts of journalism” across all platforms should be protected. And this is an issue I’ve talked about before in the EJN discussion over who is considered a journalist these days.
In all we need more recognition in the public mind of the need for responsible, ethical communications and ethical journalism can be an inspiration for winning the argument in the open information space.
But for that to happen people inside journalism have to promote good media governance to ensure the people who need protection receive it and we have to train our reporters and editors to make them skilled in the art of negotiation with sources, to build confidence in those who genuinely need protection, and keeping at arm’s length the swindlers and con-artists who make juicy information available at a price.
again, i encourage reading the whole article. and for context, see this previous entry.
https://ethicaljournalismnetwork.org/protecting-sources-keep-journalism-alive
4TH DECEMBER 2019
Protecting the Sources Who Keep Journalism Alive
Aidan White
Journalists can’t be everywhere to witness these events for themselves, so they rely on others to provide them with the facts, eye-witness testimony and insider secrets they need to tell their stories.
These are our sources of information. They are the lifeblood of quality journalism. Reporters may be stylish writers or polished presenters, but what counts most to the public is the reliability of the stories they tell, and that depends on the quality of our sources.
These may be people with their own stories to tell, or who are experts and insiders. They may give us testimony or written reports or confidential documents, even pictures or recordings – all potentially vital in exposing corruption or wrong-doing in public life.
Sometimes people take huge risks to give journalists information that the public needs to know. Edward Snowden, for example, worked with the National Security Agency (NSA) in the United States, and he became a heroic friend of journalism and democracy when he blew the whistle on how the United States government was engaged in a process of mass surveillance across the globe.
Snowden released thousands of documents providing secret information to journalists in the United States and Britain about the scale of the surveillance, including how the NSA was even snooping on the leaders of other countries, by listening to their phone calls.
He became a public enemy in the US and is now a fugitive, living in Moscow. But the information he gave to responsible news media about America’s secret shadowing and interference in global communications has made the world a safer place.
Journalists are always in debt to the heroism of whistle-blowers like Snowden when it comes to exposing the abuse of state power.
the cardinal principle of the journalists’ code – to protect our sources of information. Our union said that this was so important that journalists should be ready to go to jail rather than betray a source, even an anonymous one.
https://ethicaljournalismnetwork.org/ethics-at-source-protecting-the-people-behind-the-stories-that-keep-journalism-alive
Protecting the People Behind the Stories That Keep Journalism Alive
Aidan White
Good sources are the lifeblood of journalism. If there were no people willing to talk to us or answer our questions, journalism could not survive. Journalists may take pride in the eloquence of their storytelling, but even the best reporters know they are only as good as their sources.
Protection of sources is the essential benchmark for ethical journalism; it is critical to creating an environment for watchdog reporting. It ensures people working inside the machines of political or corporate power can feel confident that if they blow the whistle on corruption they will not be victimised.
When protection is weak media report less on the scourge of hypocrisy and double-dealing in public life. Democracy inevitably suffers: government becomes complacent; the rule of law becomes arbitrary; and inequality in society increases.
and
The world may be better connected than ever, but new threats are emerging:
There is increased surveillance and monitoring of people’s communications by the state. Everyone, journalists and their sources included, are tracked and followed – their emails and Internet messages are easily accessible both to state and corporate agencies;
In the new age of terrorism and global criminal networks there is mandatory collection and retention of data, including billions of telephone and email conversations, which is ordered by the state in the name of anti-terrorism, combating corruption, or money-laundering;
The tools we use – mobile devices, smartphones and computers — are tracking devices that can identify who we are talking to and plot where we are at any time. They can be easily accessed by third parties with sophisticated tools with a chilling capacity to uncover our files and track our communications history;
There is less public respect for privacy, widespread abuse of the right to anonymity and fragile legal safeguards because of outdated laws which are more suited to the analogue rather than the digital age.
These issues are highlighted in a recent study conducted by UNESCO. . . .
The preliminary findings of UNESCO study, launched at the World Association of Newspapers conference in Washington on June 2nd, finds that targeting sources triggers cover-ups and destruction of information, with new legal threats and sources of information running dry. Ultimately there is the threat of increased self-censorship.
and
The discussion covered a range of challenges for media including dealing with politically-active insiders with their own axe to grind and people who want to sell information knowing that cash-strapped media will often be ready to pay for exclusives.
They discussed how politically-savvy people can manipulate media with carefully planned leaks and who can make even distinguished journalists look foolish when their cover is blown (Judith Miller, the hapless New York Times reporter who was fed exclusives over weapons of mass destruction and the Iraq war is one victim).
Protecting Sources
On the other hand people may lose their job if they are exposed for telling secrets that reveal corporate sleaze or malpractice. Others risk prosecution or threats to their physical safety for whistle-blowing. Just ask Edward Snowden who exposed the scandal of America’s global spying programme. He remains on the run and is now in exile in Moscow.
Very often sources can be vulnerable people, the victims of people trafficking for instance, or people who are victims of poverty, war and social dislocation. They may need support and guidance so that they don’t unintentionally put themselves further at risk through hasty or ill-judged disclosure.
Good reporters, conscious of their own power, will always protect people against themselves. In today’s world protection of sources has become one of the most urgent battlegrounds for the survival of public interest journalism. (emphasis mine.)
and
More immediate is a question that faces policymakers and judges everywhere as they try to administer legal safeguards for whistle-blowing – just who is a journalist in the age of open information? And who, therefore, is entitled to legal protection over the protection of sources?
The UNESCO study referred to earlier also makes the point that “acts of journalism” across all platforms should be protected. And this is an issue I’ve talked about before in the EJN discussion over who is considered a journalist these days.
In all we need more recognition in the public mind of the need for responsible, ethical communications and ethical journalism can be an inspiration for winning the argument in the open information space.
But for that to happen people inside journalism have to promote good media governance to ensure the people who need protection receive it and we have to train our reporters and editors to make them skilled in the art of negotiation with sources, to build confidence in those who genuinely need protection, and keeping at arm’s length the swindlers and con-artists who make juicy information available at a price.
