
Surveillance forces journalists to think and act like spies - winst0n
https://cpj.org/2015/04/attacks-on-the-press-surveillance-forces-journalists-to-think-act-like-spies.php
======
teddyh
Well, let’s see where the incentives take us.

Journalists want to report on interesting things which people want to read
about or watch. Reporting on things by secret informants and sources is a bit
harder, but usually worth is because it gives a better story. But informants
who have to be kept secret from _the government_ is another matter – it’s
nigh-impossible, even for an expert, to keep such things secret from the NSA
and all its collaborators (knowing and unknowing). So these stories are much
harder to do, but the story itself is _not_ that much more interesting than
other possible stories which does not have the same level of government
interest. For this reason, the journalists are incentivized to avoid stories
which attract the government’s interest. As the government’s interest grows to
encompass all things, the journalist is therefore pressed to nevertheless
report on stories within the government’s scope of interest, even though the
risk is high for failure. The obvious solution for the government is to
_provide_ juicy stories for journalists to report on which are not in the
government interest – the more frivolous, the better.

And thus we can explain today’s media landscape.

~~~
mhuffman
Using your theory as a lens to observe current events in Baltimore (Ferguson,
etc.), where the media is really responsible for fanning the flames of outrage
to riot proportions -- it seems that the government is either ineffective at
this refocusing of media and not really an issue, or so diabolically effective
that we should all be shitting our pants.

~~~
mschuster91
> or so diabolically effective that we should all be shitting our pants.

Buncha rioters looting cities. Nothing better to prove your "tough on crime"
attitude or to activate military powers... (yes, I know, calling in the
National Guard is commonplace in the US, but virtually unthinkable in Germany)

~~~
maxerickson
Someone from the Maryland National Guard was in front of cameras this morning
emphasizing that their presence was not under a declaration of martial law
(which is a perhaps pedantic interpretation of "activate military powers", but
there you go).

The situation in Baltimore (a city of 600,000, a metro of several million)
looks to me like it is limited to at most a few thousand people. The idea that
the media fanned these people into action is silly. They see large crowds of
people (that are not rioting or looting) engaging with the police and see it
as an opportunity to do whatever they want while hiding in those crowds.

The most common type of small riots in the US are sports related, those riots
are certainly not the result of the media fanning flames, they are a result of
small numbers of people feeling like they can hide in a crowd.

------
tempodox
I would put that title even more pointed: Surveillance makes us all criminals
before the fact. We're being made suspects 24/7, from birth to death. It's
only a question of time until avoiding surveillance will be a criminal act in
itself.

~~~
mykhamill
Reminds me of this game. [http://nothing-to-hide-
demo.s3.amazonaws.com/index.html](http://nothing-to-hide-
demo.s3.amazonaws.com/index.html)

------
csandreasen
I'm curious if the author actually reached out to ask the opinion of the
people he cites, or just pick and chose quotes to support his premise. The
author cited the Grugq twice in the article; the Grugq's response to the
article was "They always acted like spies, sans security."[1]

[1]
[https://twitter.com/thegrugq/status/592884129441677312](https://twitter.com/thegrugq/status/592884129441677312)

------
crusso
What does it say about the balance of power in a society where the media is
completely unable to fend off relentless attacks on its sovereignty?

This is a very slippery slope that we're on.

~~~
mooreds
The media don't have "sovereignty". What they do is provide information to the
public so that the public can exercise sovereignty. There's a reason that
freedom of the press is part of the first amendment (in the USA).

Worrying, indeed. Support your local ACLU and EFF, etc.

~~~
thatcat
"Somebody — was it Burke? — called journalism the fourth estate. That was true
at the time no doubt. But at the present moment it is the only estate. It has
eaten up the other three. The Lords Temporal say nothing, the Lords Spiritual
have nothing to say, and the House of Commons has nothing to say and says it.
We are dominated by Journalism" \- oscar wilde

It lost it's sovereignty when the gov stopped communicating directly with the
people and started using the media as a mouth piece. This connected the two,
giving more editorial influence to the gov due to its control over who could
have access to source material.

------
higherpurpose
The Sun announced it has implemented SecureDrop as well yesterday, along with
a strong message against mass surveillance:

[http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/6429126/The-Sun-
Wh...](http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/6429126/The-Sun-
Whistleblower-Charter.html)

~~~
lackingcaffeine
Pretty ironic considering how anti-Snowden and anti-Guardian the Sun was over
the leaks i.e.

[http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/suncolumnists/louisemen...](http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/suncolumnists/louisemensch/5138296/Sun-
on-Sunday-Columnist-Louise-Mensch-gives-her-view-on-weeks-news.html)

Surprisingly there was a complete volte-face when it emerged GCHQ were spying
on journalists too, perhaps "nothing to hide, nothing to fear" isn't as
convincing when you're the one being targeted.

------
personlurking
An 'interesting' thing might happen in the future if this forces people to
censor themselves. In Iran, for example (according to part of a documentary I
saw), journalists and writers have to be creative in order to say what they
want w/o actually saying what they want (ie, they let their audience read
between the lines). While far from ideal, constraints can breed creativity.

~~~
creshal
> While far from ideal, constraints can breed creativity.

Just look at Biedermeier, Nazi or Soviet era art to get a comparison what
wide-spread censorship and surveillance can do to a society.

What's that? You don't remember any because it's either boring as fuck or
blatant propaganda?

Oh, hm. Well.

(Okay, it's not _that_ bad in reality. But periods of mass surveillance
usually weren't golden ages of creativity, to put it mildly.)

~~~
tokai
While I in no way condone censorship or dictatorship I can remember a few
pieces.

Triumph of the Will is still looked at as a millstone in cinema, and the
soviets produced very memorable sculptural works such as The Motherland Calls
to name two. Both regimes also had some of the most memorable (propoganda)
posters ever made, that are still awesome visual works to this day (even
though the content they communicate is abominable).

------
Balgair
[https://supporters.eff.org/donate](https://supporters.eff.org/donate)

