Showing posts with label media. Show all posts
Showing posts with label media. Show all posts
Sunday 3 November 2019
The Guardian (Australia) pledge on climate change reporting
This pledge is at the bottom of a number of The Guardian webpages:
We will not stay quiet…
...on the escalating climate crisis. This is the Guardian's pledge: we will continue to give global heating, wildlife extinction and pollution the urgent attention and prominence they demand. The Guardian recognises the climate emergency as the defining issue of our times.
Our independence means we are free to investigate and challenge inaction by those in power. We will inform our readers about threats to the environment based on scientific facts, not driven by commercial or political interests. And we have made several important changes to our style guide to ensure the language we use accurately reflects the environmental catastrophe.
In Australia, we commit to delivering the most comprehensive environmental reporting in the country. We will hold those in power to account for their inadequate national response and keep our focus on the actions of the Morrison government. Guardian Australia will continue to pursue deep investigations into the most important environmental issues.
The Guardian believes that the problems we face on the climate crisis are systemic and that fundamental societal change is needed. We will keep reporting on the efforts of individuals and communities around the world who are fearlessly taking a stand for future generations and the preservation of human life on earth. We want their stories to inspire hope. We will also report back on our own progress as an organisation, as we take important steps to address our impact on the environment.
The Guardian made a choice: to keep our journalism open to all. We do not have a paywall because we believe everyone deserves access to factual information, regardless of where they live or what they can afford.
We hope you will consider supporting the Guardian’s open, independent reporting today. Every contribution from our readers, however big or small, is so valuable.
Labels:
climate change,
media,
The Guardian
Wednesday 30 October 2019
Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison caught misrepresenting climate change facts to the United Nations
The
Australian,
24 October 2019:
At
the United Nations during his US trip, Scott Morrison said that when
it came to per capita investment in clean energy, Australia spent
more than “anywhere in the world”. Not a lot of ambiguity there.
He repeated the claim last week in parliament, but instead of
referring to clean energy the PM narrowed the description down to
renewables.
Both
claims are false, the latter more so than the first.
The
Australia Institute decided to look into the claim, which was based
on a Bloomberg study which revealed yes, Australia has the highest
per capita investment in clean energy of 14 countries it looked at.
The Prime Minister’s office confirmed to me that was the source for
his UN claim.
Where
to start …
I
suspect most readers, along with the PM, realise that there are more
than 14 countries in the world. Quite a few more actually. You don’t
have to be Einstein to know that. Which means relying on a 14 country
study to make the wild claim that we spend more per capita on clean
energy (we’ll forget when the PM misspoke in the parliament about
“renewables”) than “anywhere in the world” is pretty silly.
Yet that’s what Morrison did, on the world stage. It’s rather
Donald Trump like.
It
turns out beyond the 14 countries in that study there are other
nations that invest more per capita than we do — in clean energy
broadly and in renewables more specifically……
But
if the PM wants to crow about something his government has criticised
in the domestic political setting that’s his choice.
However
it was plain wrong to claim we are first. And unnecessary, given we
do so well despite not being first.
When
I first flagged this inaccuracy by the PM last Friday in a news
package for Network Ten his office were quick to accuse me of being
misleading and complained that when calling out the inaccuracy I
didn’t specifically refer to the report which showed we were number
one.
Never
mind that the PM didn’t refer to the 14 country study either in his
15 minute speech. Apparently I should have done so in my one minute
ten seconds package. Weird to expect me to cite a source the PM
didn’t cite when making a claim the source didn’t make…….
The
next tactic in the PMO complaints was to attack the credibility of
the Australia Institute — which yes we can categorise as a left
leaning think tank. Reminiscent of John Howard’s “who do you
trust” campaign in 2004, I was asked (though it wasn’t really a
question) which organisation do I trust more: the highly credible
Bloomberg which did the 14 country study, or the ideologically
compromised
Australia Institute.
But
the Australia Institute report didn’t contradict the Bloomberg
study. It accepted it, simply pointing out it only examined 14
countries. The criticism for inaccuracy was levelled at the PM, who
misused that study to claim first place over every single country
across the globe, not Bloomberg. So which organisation anyone thinks
is more or less credible just isn’t relevant. It is a red herring.
This
is just one example of the way political spin doctors try and
challenge entirely fair and reasonable reporting and commentary. Or
the way some do, anyway. The funny thing is they become like the boy
who cried wolf when they do so this way. Of course journalists and
commentators make mistakes and misjudgements. Meaning that there is
always a place for the media guardians of a PM or any politician to
(politely) complain or correct.
But
when they do so on flimsy ground, or no grounds like in this example,
they make journalists and commentators instantly cynical of the next
time they whinge, just like the boy who cries wolf.
Labels:
journalists,
lies and lying,
media,
propaganda,
Scott Morrison
Sunday 27 October 2019
This is the Singleton Argus article that either the NSW Deputy-Premier or his office alleges is "seditious"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
'the offence [sedition] is one if the person urges by force or violence the overthrowing of a government, or interfering with an election, or encouraging other people to use – or groups of people – to use force or violence against other groups' [The Attorney-General, Hon Philip Ruddock MP, Alan Jones Radio Programme, 14 November 2005, quoted in Australian Parliamentary Library, "In Good Faith:Sedition Law in Australia", 23 August 2010]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
It appears that NSW Deputy-Premier, Minister for Regional New South Wales, Industry and Trade & Liberal MP for Monaro, John Barilaro, is unhappy with journalists having an opinion about the mining industry, state government agencies or the region in which they live and work......This statement from the NSW Deputy Premier's office on this week's opinion piece 'There were some arresting remarks made in the article that were as inaccurate as they were seditious.'#RightToKnow— The Singleton Argus (@SingletonArgus) October 24, 2019
There were two articles published online by The Singleton Argus on 22 October 2019 which dealt with the NSW Independent Commission Against Corruption's current review of lobbying activities, access and influence in this state.
The first was a local news article and the second an opinion piece by the same journalist on the same subject.
It was this second piece which is the allegedly "seditious" item that either the Deputy-Premier or his staff apparently decided included content intended to incite violence, public disorder or a public offence:
The first was a local news article and the second an opinion piece by the same journalist on the same subject.
It was this second piece which is the allegedly "seditious" item that either the Deputy-Premier or his staff apparently decided included content intended to incite violence, public disorder or a public offence:
"Here we go again - the NSW Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) is hearing evidence about mining approvals - what, haven't we learnt our lessons from the Doyles Creek and Mt Penny inquiries all those years ago?
This time ICAC's Operation Eclipse is not investigating actual corrupt conduct by individuals but rather it is seeking' to examine particular aspects of lobbying activities and the corruption risks involved in the lobbying of public authorities and officials.'
At the same time as ICAC is seeking information about the influence of lobbying on government decision making Planning Minister Rob Stokes announced the terms of reference for the review into the operations of the Independent Planning Commission.
Included in the terms of reference is a question about whether the IPC should exist at all.
Scary when one considers that the former ICAC commissioner David Ipp, QC was quoted in the Sydney Morning Herald saying such a move was 'a recipe for corruption'.
The more things change the more they stay the same it would appear when it comes to planning state significant mining projects in NSW.
As an invited witness to this week's Operation Eclipse hearings NSW Minerals Council, chief executive officer Stephen Galilee voiced his strong opinions about the current state of mine approvals in NSW.
He is not happy that Bylong Coal Project was refused, that Dartbrook Underground was only half approved and that United Wambo and Rix's Creek were approved but it took too long so he was still very unhappy.
Mr Galilee is welcome is hold these opinions he works to promote mineral extraction in NSW but his opinions should not over ride due process.
We have seen what happens when mining licences are granted behind closed doors, people made millions often corruptly and the community is treated poorly or not considered at all.
No way should we go back to the bad old days in mine approvals.
We should be planning for our future where we have clean air to breath and new industries for our current mining workforce.
Instead of wasting time and money on the IPC review lets get started with planning for a just transition for our region.
The longer we put off the inevitable transition the harder it will hit our region - want to be part of that Mr Galilee?"
For the life of me I cannot see this as a journalistic call for citizens to man the barricades armed to the teeth and ready to do violence.
Perhaps in the future whichever of the Deputy-Premier's minions crafted that particular email should pause, open a dictionary and a copy of the Crimes Act before choosing his adjectives.
Then when he next rushes to the defence of his minister's 'mates' he won't rashly accuse a journalist of a grave unlawful act.
For the life of me I cannot see this as a journalistic call for citizens to man the barricades armed to the teeth and ready to do violence.
Perhaps in the future whichever of the Deputy-Premier's minions crafted that particular email should pause, open a dictionary and a copy of the Crimes Act before choosing his adjectives.
Then when he next rushes to the defence of his minister's 'mates' he won't rashly accuse a journalist of a grave unlawful act.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
'as long as the various sedition offences remain, governments will inevitably be
tempted to use them improperly, especially when highly unpopular opinions are
expressed' [Sydney Law Review, (1992) Maher, L.W.,"The Use and Abuse of Sedition"]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Saturday 26 October 2019
Tweets of the Week
Unity message to the government from Australia's papers #mediawatch #rightoknow pic.twitter.com/wuE9ZyGjQx— Media Watch (@ABCmediawatch) October 20, 2019
Scott Morrison’s arrogant dodging of questions is spreading through his Department - nobody is prepared to reveal the truth on the PM’s attempt to get a White House invitation for Brian Houston. #righttoknow #estimates pic.twitter.com/uBAIRG5ZZR— Senator Penny Wong (@SenatorWong) October 21, 2019
Labels:
Australian politics,
free speech,
media
Sunday 1 September 2019
Australian PM Scott Morrison gets a slap in the face from regional News Corp masthead
The Daily Examiner, 29 August 2019:
OUR SAY
BILL NORTH
Editor
Be sure to verify statements before you take them with a grain of salt – even when they’re delivered by our most trustworthy Prime Minister. It’s probably not a profound statement given today’s world leaders and proliferation of fake news.
But once upon a time, you could trust your national leader to rise above the spin. Scott Morrison’s response to the GetUp campaign during the federal election – which succeeded in ousting colleague Tony Abbott, if little else – was to smear the activist group with nothing short of propoganda.
He has accused GetUp of bullying and misogyny – two words more apt for describing some of the far-right politicians who were targeted not because of their political allegiance, but because they actively blocked progress on environmental and humanitarian issues that, in the eyes of GetUp, shouldn’t be political footballs.
As an observant member of the media with no political allegiance, but an environmentally conscious soul, I was on the GetUp mailing list.
In this age of ruthless political tactics, GetUp’s consistency to their cause using fact-based evidence in an articulate, respectful and considered tone gave them far more credibility in my mind than any political party.
If all you know about GetUp is how they’ve been portrayed in the media, then please read a couple of their releases, before jumping on the bandwagon.
You might not agree with their philosophies, but they do play clean and fair.
Monday 17 June 2019
Australian mainstream media learns another lesson as to why racism is bad policy
BuzzFeed
News, 13 June
2019:
Channel Seven has failed
in its bid to strike out a lawsuit brought by a group of Aboriginal people who
say they were defamed during a now infamous panel discussion on breakfast TV
show Sunrise about adopting Indigenous children.
Yolngu woman Kathy
Mununggurr and 14 others from the remote community of Yirrkala, including
adults and children, are suing the TV network after they were depicted in
blurred overlay footage that played during the segment in March 2018.
In the discussion, hosted
by Samantha Armytage, commentator Prue Macsween said of the Stolen Generations
that “we need to do it again, perhaps”, and then-radio host Ben Davis said
Aboriginal kids are getting “abused” and “damaged”.
The comments made by the
all-white panel provoked protests outside the Sunrise studio in
Sydney's CBD.
Mununggurr and the
adults suing argue they were identifiable in the footage and that by playing it
during the discussion Sunrise had suggested they abused, assaulted or
neglected children, were incapable of protecting their children, and were
members of a dysfunctional community.
The children suing say
the program defamed them by suggesting they had been raped and assaulted, and
were so vulnerable to danger that they should be removed from their families.
The group is also suing
for breach of confidence and breach of privacy, as well as misleading and
deceptive conduct and unconscionable conduct under the Australian Consumer Law.
The TV network tried to
strike out all aspects of the lawsuit in a Federal Court hearing on Wednesday
afternoon, but was slapped down by Justice Steven Rares, who said all the
issues could and should be argued at trial…..
"This is about an
Aboriginal community. They’re all very close. The neighbours know each other,
they all know each other," the judge said.
"You’ve got a whole
community up there, most of whom will be able to recognise each other,
obviously some of whom who watch Sunrise, or whatever the show is called."…...
Rares accepted there was
an argument that Davis and the radio station 4BC were being promoted during the
segment, but was less convinced when it came to Macsween.
“To me she’s a nobody.
I’ve never heard of her and I’ve got no idea what contribution she possibly
could have made to the program,” he said.
Nonetheless Rares sided
with Catanzariti and declined to strike out the claim.
Seven's attempts to
strike out the remaining claims of breach of confidence, breach of privacy and
unconscionable conduct were similarly rejected.
Seven was ordered to pay
the costs of the hearing.
Labels:
Federal Court,
indigenous culture,
law,
media,
racism,
television
Wednesday 12 June 2019
PRESS FREEDOM IN AUSTRALIA: Letting The Light In - Part Two
The Canberra Times, 6 June 2018:
2GB radio host Ben Fordham also
revealed this week that he has been contacted by the Department of Home Affairs
about his reporting, with the department investigating how he obtained
"highly confidential" information about asylum seeker vessels.
Fordham said the
department was seeking his co-operation with the probe, which could become a
criminal investigation and "potentially" involve a police raid.
The original radio
broadcast……
2GB Radio,
Sydney
Live with Ben Fordham, 3 June 2019:
The Department of Home
Affairs is investigating reports from Sri Lanka that up to six boats could have
recently attempted journeys to Australia.
Home Affairs Minister
Peter Dutton admitted last week there could be a wave of illegal vessels headed
for Australia after 20 Sri Lankan asylum seekers were sent back.
A senior source in Home
Affairs has told Ben Fordham Mr Dutton is currently in Sri Lanka because “there
could be up to six boats in play”.
Out of the six believed
to be headed for Australia, some may have been disrupted.
Ben says the recent wave
of illegal boats could be because of the recent federal election.
“Is there a chance that
the people smugglers were able to flog seats on boats… because they thought
Labor was going to win the election?”
Full original segment audio
can be accessed here.
Further reading
North Coast Voices, 9 June 2019, PRESS FREEDOM IN AUSTRALIA: Letting The Light In - Part One
North Coast Voices, June 2019, On 4 June 2019 federal police raided home of Newscorp journalist over story detailing an alleged government proposal to spy on Australians
Monday 10 June 2019
Did ABC Radio bow to pressure from the Adani Group?
One of the worst kept secrets in Australia is that the multinational Adani mining group, for reasons known only to its company board in India, wants to build a mine in the Galilee Basin but has no intention of building a financially viable mine.
And Adani really dislikes the media mentioning this fact......
ABC, Media Watch, transcript
excerpt, 3 June 2019:
But now let’s come back
closer to home to Adani, whose controversial Carmichael mine in Queensland’s
Galilee Basin gets ever closer to construction, despite this scathing piece in
The Sydney Morning Herald by Bloomberg columnist David Fickling:
The
numbers on Adani simply don't add up
Comparable
projects like Glencore's Wandoan have been mothballed for years.
-
The Sydney Morning Herald, 24 May, 2019
Fickling’s op-ed 10 days
ago argued that the Adani mine may never be built — even if it does get final
approval — because it’s currently much cheaper to buy coal than dig it out of a
brand-new coal mine.
And over at ABC Radio,
Saturday AM thought that was worth a story.
But after being worked
on by Isobel Roe, a young award-winning journalist in Brisbane, it never made
it to air.
So, why was that? Well,
Media Watch can reveal that Adani complained to the ABC in advance. And the
story was spiked.
So how did this all
unfold?
Bloomberg has confirmed
to Media Watch that David Fickling was interviewed by the ABC on the afternoon
of Friday, 24th of May.
And just over an hour
later, at 4.20pm, Adani say Roe contacted them for comment.
And not long after that,
at 5.50pm, the producer of Saturday AM, Thomas Oriti, told ABC staff he was
killing the story.
Now, newsrooms at the
ABC are open plan and not very private and four witnesses tell Media Watch that
Oriti made it clear Adani had complained.
Indeed, one claims he
told Roe:
‘Sorry.
It’s nothing to do with you, but we’re not going to be able to run this’.
-
Phone interview, ABC staffer, 31 May, 2019
While another claims he
said:
‘It’s
not my decision, it’s come from on high.’
-
Phone interview, ABC staffer, 31 May, 2019
The ABC denies this and
maintains his decision was taken entirely on editorial merit, because the story
didn’t stack up.
So what can we be sure
of?
Well, there’s no doubt
Adani did complain, both to the reporter when she rang and, shortly after, to
her bosses. A company spokesperson told us:
…
we raised concerns with ABC management when approached to comment on a story
that contained inaccuracies and was potentially biased ...
-
Email, Adani spokesperson, 31 May, 2019
Adani says it told the
reporter she should talk to an analyst more friendly to the mining sector.
And when she asked them
to suggest someone, Adani’s PR team cracked it and went over her head to ABC
management:
Adani
complained that it was not reasonable that the onus for ensuring that ABC news
coverage was fair and balanced should fall back onto the company and not onto
the ABC’s well-resourced newsrooms.
-
Email, Adani spokesperson, 31 May, 2019
A key feature of Adani’s
complaint was that the ABC had not given it enough time to respond.
But in fact by Friday
afternoon Fickling’s work had been up for more than 36 hours.
And Adani was
able to send a statement to the ABC almost immediately.
So, who at the ABC dealt
with the company’s complaint?
We’re told Adani went
straight to the top — ABC News boss Gaven Morris — who we understand is the
person they normally contact.
So to clarify what
happened, we asked Morris a series of questions, which included:
Did
Adani contact you last Friday afternoon to complain about the story?
What
was the nature of the complaint, and how did you respond?
Why
was the story pulled, given that it had been commissioned for Saturday AM only
hours beforehand?
Was
the decision to pull the story taken after Adani’s complaint?
Why
was this complaint handled personally by you?
-
Email, Media Watch to Gaven Morris, 31 May, 2019
We did not get a
response from Gaven Morris or answers to most of those questions.
Instead, an ABC
spokesperson told us:
There
was no complaint.
-
Email, ABC spokesperson, 31 May, 2019
Which is remarkable,
because Adani says there was…..
Full
transcript here.
BACKGROUND
“The numbers on Adani
simply don't add up”,
The Sydney Morning Herald, 24 May
2019
at https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/the-numbers-on-adani-simply-don-t-add-up-20190524-p51qoy.html.
Labels:
ABC radio,
coal,
media,
mining,
self-censorship
Tuesday 4 June 2019
On 4 June 2019 federal police raided home of Newscorp journalist over story detailing an alleged government proposal to spy on Australians
It seems that someone in the Morrison Government may have laid a complaint........
Braidwood
Times, 4 June
2019:
Federal police have
raided the home of a journalist over a 2018 story detailing an alleged
government proposal to spy on Australians.
Australian Federal
Police officers produced a warrant to search the home, computer and mobile
phone of Canberra-based News Corp Australia journalist Annika Smethurst, The
Daily Telegraph reports.
The story in question
had included images of letters between the heads of the Home Affairs and
Defence departments, discussing potential new powers for the Australian Signals
Directorate (ASD).
The powers would have
allowed the ASD's cyber sleuths to monitor Australian citizens and businesses
on home soil, rather than being limited to gathering intelligence on
foreigners, the story said.
The AFP said the raid is
in relation to "alleged unauthorised disclosure of national security
information" and that no arrests are expected on Tuesday.
"Police will allege
the unauthorised disclosure of these specific documents undermines Australia's
national security," the agency said in a statement…...
BACKGROUND
Sunday Tasmanian, 6 May 2018, p.13:
The Federal Government
has “war-gamed” scenarios where our cyber spy agency needed to be
given the power to investigate Australian citizens.
Last week the Sunday
Tasmanian revealed a secret plan to increase the Australian Signals
Directorate’s powers to allow them to spy on Aussies.
Department bosses
claimed there was “no proposal to increase the ASD’s powers to collect intelligence
on Australians”. But letters between Home Affairs secretary Mike Pezzullo and
Defence Secretary Greg Moriarty reveal the departments of Home Affairs and
Defence allocated staff to war game a raft of scenarios where the ASD would
need to spy on Australians.
The list of scenarios
were compiled in two attachments and sent to the heads of both departments
under the headline “scenarios proposed by Home Affairs”.
The document explains
how ASD could be used to disrupt “onshore and offshore online threats” such as
“disrupting child exploitation networks and terrorist networks” and “illicit
drug importation, money laundering and serious crimes”.
Last week’s Sunday
Tasmanian exclusive has prompted calls for MPs to have greater oversight of
Australia’s intelligence agencies…..
Sunday Telegraph, 29 April 2018, p.5:
Australia’s intelligence
watchdog has warned the Australian Signals Directorate against any moves that
would change the agency’s focus “to people and organisations inside Australia”
instead of focusing on activities overseas.
The veiled warning came
in March during a review into new laws which established the ASD as a statutory
body.
In her submission,
Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security (IGIS) Margaret Stone, a former
Federal Court judge, said under the current laws ASD is not permitted to access
digital information located inside Australia.
“Accessing data located
inside Australia is properly an action that requires an ASIO or police
warrant,” she said in her submission.
“Nothing in the
Intelligence Services Act would allow ASD to access restricted data on a
computer physically located inside Australia — even where doing so would assist
in gathering intelligence or disrupting crime,” she said…..
Sunday Telegraph, 29 April 2018, p.4:
Two powerful government
agencies are discussing radical new espionage powers that would see Australia’s
cyber spy agency monitor Australian citizens for the first time.
Under the plan, emails,
bank records and text messages of Australians could be secretly accessed by
digital spies without a trace, provided the Defence and Home Affairs
ministers approved.
The power grab is
detailed in top secret letters between the heads of the Department of Home
Affairs and Defence, seen by The Sunday Telegraph, which outline proposed new
powers for Australia’s electronic spy agency — the Australian Signals
Directorate (ASD).
The Sunday Telegraph can
reveal the Secretary of the Department of Home Affairs Mike Pezzullo first
wrote to the Defence Secretary Greg Moriarty in February outlining the plan to
potentially allow government hackers to “proactively disrupt and covertly
remove” onshore cyber threats by “hacking into critical infrastructure”.
Under current laws the
ASD — whose mission statement is “Reveal Their Secrets — Protect Our Own” —
must not conduct an activity to produce intelligence on an Australian.
Instead, the Australian
Federal Police and domestic spy agency ASIO have the power to
investigate Australians with a warrant and can ask ASD for technical advice if
they don’t have the capabilities they need.
The Attorney-General is
responsible for issuing ASIO warrants, but the agency’s operations will fall
under the umbrella of Home Affairs.
Under the proposal, seen
by The Sunday Telegraph, Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton and Defence
Minister Marise Payne would tick off on orders allowing cyber spooks to target
onshore threats without the country’s top law officer knowing.
Last month the proposal
was compiled in a top secret ministerial submission signed by ASD boss Mike
Burgess. The proposal outlines scenarios where Canberra-based cyber spies would
use offensive tactics to “counter or disrupt cyber-enabled criminals both
onshore and offshore”.
“The Department of Home
Affairs advises that it is briefing the Minister for Home Affairs to write to
you (Ms Payne) seeking your support for a further tranche of legislative reform
to enable ASD to better support a range of Home Affairs priorities.”
But The
Sunday Telegraph understands Mr Dutton has not written to Minister Payne and no
formal proposal for leglslative amendments have been presented to Government.
“The Australian Signals
Directorate has not prepared ministerial advice seeking permissions to allow
ASD to counter or disrupt cyber-enabled criminals onshore,” a spokesman for Ms
Payne said.
An intelligence source
said such reforms would allow cyber spies to secretly access
digital information on Australians without detection, including financial
transactions, health data and phone records.
“It would give the most
powerful cyber spies the power to turn on its own citizens,” the
source said.
The letter also details
a proposal for coercive “step-in” powers, meaning the intelligence agency could
force government agencies and private businesses to “comply with security
measures”.
The intelligence source
said ASD could be able to compel companies and government agencies to hand over
data or security information…… [my yellow highlighting]
The
Guardian, 25
January 2018:
Proposed changes to
Australia’s national security laws that could see journalists and
whistleblowers jailed for up to 20 years will “criminalise” reporting and
undermine the media’s ability to act in the public interest, the nation’s major
news outlets have warned.
In a joint
submission, 14 major media outlets including the ABC, Fairfax Media and
News Corp said sweeping changes to national security laws proposed by the
federal government would place journalists at “significant risk of jail time”
for doing their jobs.
The reforms,
tabled just hours after marriage equality became law in December, would
increase tenfold the maximum penalty for anyone who communicates or “deals
with” information which could potentially “cause harm to Australia’s
interests,” where that information is obtained via a government official
without authorisation.
Labels:
AFP,
intelligence,
journalists,
media,
national security,
News Corp,
spies
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)