POLITICAL JOURNALISM: Shield laws in Australia: Legal and ethical implications for journalists and their confidential sources

This article examines whether Australia’s current shield law regime meets journalists’ expectations and whistleblower needs in an era of unprecedented official surveillance capabilities. According to the peak journalists’ organisation, the Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance (MEAA), two recent Au...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Joseph Fernandez, Mark Pearson
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Asia Pacific Network 2015
Materias:	Australia confidentiality contempt of court ethics media law shield law Communication. Mass media P87-96 Journalism. The periodical press, etc. PN4699-5650
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/74548d5fab1d4dd0b131f3638c87234d
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:74548d5fab1d4dd0b131f3638c87234d
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:74548d5fab1d4dd0b131f3638c87234d2021-12-02T10:18:46ZPOLITICAL JOURNALISM: Shield laws in Australia: Legal and ethical implications for journalists and their confidential sources10.24135/pjr.v21i1.1481023-94992324-2035https://doaj.org/article/74548d5fab1d4dd0b131f3638c87234d2015-05-01T00:00:00Zhttps://ojs.aut.ac.nz/pacific-journalism-review/article/view/148https://doaj.org/toc/1023-9499https://doaj.org/toc/2324-2035This article examines whether Australia’s current shield law regime meets journalists’ expectations and whistleblower needs in an era of unprecedented official surveillance capabilities. According to the peak journalists’ organisation, the Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance (MEAA), two recent Australian court cases ‘despite their welcome outcome for our members, clearly demonstrate Australia’s patchy and disparate journalist shields fail to do their job’ (MEAA, 2014a). Journalists’ recent court experiences exposed particular shield law inadequacies, including curious omissions or ambiguities in legislative drafting (Fernandez, 2014c, p. 131); the ‘unusual difficulty’ that a case may present (Hancock Prospecting No 2, 2014, para 7); the absence of definitive statutory protection in three jurisdictions—Queensland, South Australia and the Northern Territory (Fernandez, 2014b, p. 26); and the absence of uniform shield laws where such law is available (Fernandez, 2014b, pp. 26-28). This article examines the following key findings of a national survey of practising journalists: (a) participants’ general profile; (b) familiarity with shield laws; (c) perceptions of shield law effectiveness and coverage; (d) perceptions of story outcomes when relying on confidential sources; and (e) concerns about official surveillance and enforcement. The conclusion briefly considers the significance and limitations of this research; future research directions; some reform and training directions; and notes that the considerable efforts to secure shield laws in Australia might be jeopardised without better training of journalists about the laws themselves and how surveillance technologies and powers might compromise source confidentiality. Joseph FernandezMark PearsonAsia Pacific NetworkarticleAustraliaconfidentialitycontempt of courtethicsmedia lawshield lawCommunication. Mass mediaP87-96Journalism. The periodical press, etc.PN4699-5650ENPacific Journalism Review, Vol 21, Iss 1 (2015)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Australia confidentiality contempt of court ethics media law shield law Communication. Mass media P87-96 Journalism. The periodical press, etc. PN4699-5650
spellingShingle	Australia confidentiality contempt of court ethics media law shield law Communication. Mass media P87-96 Journalism. The periodical press, etc. PN4699-5650 Joseph Fernandez Mark Pearson POLITICAL JOURNALISM: Shield laws in Australia: Legal and ethical implications for journalists and their confidential sources
description	This article examines whether Australia’s current shield law regime meets journalists’ expectations and whistleblower needs in an era of unprecedented official surveillance capabilities. According to the peak journalists’ organisation, the Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance (MEAA), two recent Australian court cases ‘despite their welcome outcome for our members, clearly demonstrate Australia’s patchy and disparate journalist shields fail to do their job’ (MEAA, 2014a). Journalists’ recent court experiences exposed particular shield law inadequacies, including curious omissions or ambiguities in legislative drafting (Fernandez, 2014c, p. 131); the ‘unusual difficulty’ that a case may present (Hancock Prospecting No 2, 2014, para 7); the absence of definitive statutory protection in three jurisdictions—Queensland, South Australia and the Northern Territory (Fernandez, 2014b, p. 26); and the absence of uniform shield laws where such law is available (Fernandez, 2014b, pp. 26-28). This article examines the following key findings of a national survey of practising journalists: (a) participants’ general profile; (b) familiarity with shield laws; (c) perceptions of shield law effectiveness and coverage; (d) perceptions of story outcomes when relying on confidential sources; and (e) concerns about official surveillance and enforcement. The conclusion briefly considers the significance and limitations of this research; future research directions; some reform and training directions; and notes that the considerable efforts to secure shield laws in Australia might be jeopardised without better training of journalists about the laws themselves and how surveillance technologies and powers might compromise source confidentiality.
format	article
author	Joseph Fernandez Mark Pearson
author_facet	Joseph Fernandez Mark Pearson
author_sort	Joseph Fernandez
title	POLITICAL JOURNALISM: Shield laws in Australia: Legal and ethical implications for journalists and their confidential sources
title_short	POLITICAL JOURNALISM: Shield laws in Australia: Legal and ethical implications for journalists and their confidential sources
title_full	POLITICAL JOURNALISM: Shield laws in Australia: Legal and ethical implications for journalists and their confidential sources
title_fullStr	POLITICAL JOURNALISM: Shield laws in Australia: Legal and ethical implications for journalists and their confidential sources
title_full_unstemmed	POLITICAL JOURNALISM: Shield laws in Australia: Legal and ethical implications for journalists and their confidential sources
title_sort	political journalism: shield laws in australia: legal and ethical implications for journalists and their confidential sources
publisher	Asia Pacific Network
publishDate	2015
url	https://doaj.org/article/74548d5fab1d4dd0b131f3638c87234d
work_keys_str_mv	AT josephfernandez politicaljournalismshieldlawsinaustralialegalandethicalimplicationsforjournalistsandtheirconfidentialsources AT markpearson politicaljournalismshieldlawsinaustralialegalandethicalimplicationsforjournalistsandtheirconfidentialsources
_version_	1718397414151290880

POLITICAL JOURNALISM: Shield laws in Australia: Legal and ethical implications for journalists and their confidential sources

Ejemplares similares