by John Lloyd
Senior Research Fellow, Reuters Institute, Univ. of Oxford
Contributing Editor, Financial Times;
Columnist, Reuters. com; La Repubblica, Rome.
Chairman of the Advisory Council, Moscow School of Civic Enlightenment
Wikileaks,
and especially the NSA leaks, face journalism with particular challenges,
both new and familiar.
First
is that which has been posed most clearly by Glenn Greenwald, who argues (with
others) that the Snowden revelations have moved journalism into a new era: from
being merely sceptical about authority, especially that of governments,
journalists should become overtly suspicious of, even hostile to, the state and
especially the intelligence services. The rationale for this is that they have
both hidden, and lied about, programmes of monitoring domestic and foreign
citizens' communications in the name of security. They have lost all
rights to an implied trust.
Second,
assuming this position above isn't taken, is the choice which must be
made by editors as to what to publish and what not to publish - that is, how
far and on what grounds should editors acceded to requests by governments not to publish material which is said by the intelligence services to be harmful to
national security and/or dangerous to intelligence officers?
Third,
as the intelligence world becomes more complex, how far are journalists
competent to understand the criteria and processes used by the intelligence
agencies - and thus how far should they seek closer relationships in order to
grasp more fully the nature of the work, with the attendant danger that they
would be consciously or unconsciously co-opted into the agencies' world and
lose distance from their subjects?
No comments:
Post a Comment