By MARCUS BREEN, Professor of Communication and Media, editor of the International Journal of Technology Knowledge and Society, and member of the Institute for Law, Government and Policy.
New York Times coverage of the National Security Administration (NSA) files leaked by contractor Edward J. Snowden, has allowed that newspaper to ask consistently pointed questions about government intrusions into communication. The coverage has been pretty modest in the way it has channelled public outrage, yet mindful of the obligations of public media. More significantly, the Times has offered helpful insights into the operations of government in the digital era.
The license it has taken to describe some of the actions of the US Government agencies – especially the NSA – has met some of the key requirements of public interest theory. The Guardian has been more pointed still. The NSA Files
Describing the collection of French data as a matter of national sovereignty for France (20 October 2013), the Times has raised the public interest bar. Reporting that the NSA recorded 70 million digital communications between December 10, 21012 and January 8, 2013, the Times has opened up questions about the US approach to international relations in the digital era. Everything is being impacted by digital communications, even national sovereignty. Some academics have suggested that sovereignty is no longer a useful category. Try running that proposition past any national leader, against the background of the US vacuum cleaning private data outside the US.
Everything is sucked into the digital vortex. vacuum cleaning data The French, the Germans, the Brazilians are right to complain. Any complaints from the Australian Government? The history of Australia is that there are few if any complaints, as Australian Governments go out of their way to be compliant with super power wishes. The words “Australia” and “national autonomy” are unlikely to appear in the same sentence. Most critics would describe this as a rather pathetic track record on Australia’s part.
Edward J, Snowden (the NSA files leaker) and Wikileaks security files offer insights into the normalised world of US “electronic eavesdropping” in a way that confirms fears that Big Brother is everywhere. Securitization – scrutiny of all communication, private and public under the umbrella of national security interests – can be assumed. It is the culture.
I am suggesting that new questions have emerged because of the scrutiny of digital communications by the NSA and the securitization vortex into which we have all been drawn. I am asking how the public interest can be defined in the current context, a context where security has redefined everyday life.
[* Note: This blog was first posted to Professor Breen’s personal blog, breencomments.blogspot.com.au]