Influence of Frames on the Wiv Referendum Framing of the New Dutch Intelligence and Security Services Act Through the Media

Influence of frames on the Wiv referendum Framing of the new Dutch Intelligence and Security Services Act through the media

Master Thesis

Name: Renske Gazenbeek

Student ID: 1246313

Master: Crisis and Security Management

Supervisor: Prof.dr. P.H.A.M. Abels

Second reader: Mr.drs. W.J.M. Aerdts

Date: August, 2018 Abstract In 2017, the Electoral Council received 384.126 valid requests for a referendum about the new Dutch Intelligence and Security Services Act. This referendum was held on 21 March 2018. In the run-up to the referendum, media reported about this act and reflected arguments of both the opponents and the proponents of the act. In this qualitative research, the framing theory of Entman (1993) is used to identify the frames that are used in different media sources and the impact of these frames on the referendum. The research points out that the Dutch intelligence and security services have previously experienced negative imaging. Furthermore, the results of this research show that there is a correlation between the dominant frames and the outcome of the referendum. A small majority of the voters voted against the new act. This outcome corresponds with the dominant frames in the media, which emphasize the impact on privacy and the extension of services’ power that is often labelled with the term ‘sleep [drag]’, and the effects of framing on a referendum.

Table of Contents

Chapters Page number

1. Introduction 1 2. Theoretical framework 5 3. Methodology 11 4. The Dutch intelligence and security services 15 5. The new Intelligence and Security Services Act 18 6. Frames in the media 27 6.1 Newspapers 27 6.1.1 Algemeen Dagblad 27 6.1.1.1 Indicators 27 6.1.1.2 Frames 29 6.1.1.3 Conclusion 32 6.1.2 Telegraaf 32 6.1.2.1 Indicators 33 6.1.2.2 Frames 35 6.1.2.3 Conclusion 38 6.1.3 NRC Handelsblad 39 6.1.3.1 Indicators 39 6.1.3.2 Frames 41 6.1.3.3 Conclusion 46 6.1.4 Trouw 46 6.1.4.1 Indicators 47 6.1.4.2 Frames 48 6.1.4.3 Conclusion 51 6.1.5 Volkskrant 52 6.1.5.1 Indicators 52 6.1.5.2 Frames 53 6.1.5.3 Conclusion 56

6.2 Television broadcasts 56 6.2.1 Zondag met Lubach 56 6.2.1.1 Indicators 56 6.2.1.2 Frames 57 6.2.2 College Tour 58 6.2.2.1 Indicators 58 6.2.2.2 Frames 59 6.2.3 Conclusion 60 6.3 Websites 60 6.3.1 Indicators 60 6.3.2 Frames 61 6.3.3 Conclusion 63 6.4 Overall conclusion of the frames in the media 63 7. Conclusion 66 Bibliography 73 Appendix: the tasks and powers of the services according to Wiv 2002 87

1. Introduction

We are currently living in a society which is focused on eliminating threats and securing the citizens. On the other hand, countries are governed by laws to make sure justice is served and civil liberties are respected. International agreements as the European Convention on Human Rights impose binding obligations for states to protect the human rights of the citizens of the countries which signed the agreement. Governments are constantly juggling to find the right balance between justice and security. In order to serve and protect national security1, the Netherlands has two combined intelligence and security services: the General Intelligence and Security Service (AIVD) and the Military Intelligence and Security Service (MIVD). The AIVD is part of the Ministry of the Interior (Wiv 2002, § 1, article 1(c)(1) and Wiv 2002, § 1, article 2), while the MIVD is part of the Ministry of Defence (Wiv 2002, § 1, article 1(c)(2) and Wiv 2002, § 1, article 2). One of the tasks of these services is to conduct investigations into people and/or organizations whom give serious suspicion that they pose a danger to national security, the democratic rule of law or other important national interests (Wiv 2002, § 2.2, article 6(2)(a)). In order to perform this task, the services are allowed to collect (personal) data. These data are collected by consulting various sources and exercising different (sometimes special) powers. While the Dutch intelligence and security services are able to gather data and conduct investigations, it is important to differentiate between an intelligence/security service and a criminal investigation service. These two terms are not interchangeable. The aim of the AIVD and the MIVD is not to detect suspects (Ellian, 2010: 122). Therefore, these services have neither investigative powers nor executive powers. Because their findings are not part of a criminal investigation, the findings can only be used as a starting point for a criminal investigation (Ellian, 2010: 125).

After the attacks of 9/11 in the United States, it became clear that terrorism was an upcoming threat for the Western world (Ellian, 2010: 139-140). The increase of terrorist attacks in Europe the last years have put governments in a difficult position. After the attacks in Madrid in 2004,

1 There is no concise, common agreed definition of national security. However, the AIVD describes it as: “Het omvat alle waarden, regels, wetten die wij in ons land van belang vinden [It includes all values, rules, laws which we identify as important in our country]” (https://www.aivd.nl/onderwerpen/het-werk-van-de-aivd/vraag-en-antwoord/wat-is-nationale- veiligheid). 1 the Dutch government tried to adjust the legal act which regulates the AIVD and the MIVD, but failed to do so. The purpose of the then proposed adjustment of this act, ‘Wet op de inlichtingen- en veiligheidsdiensten 2002’, was to implement more powers for the services to investigate potential terrorist threats (Muller & Voermans, 2017: 102). One of the critical changes was captured in article 29b of this proposal. According to this article, public and private organizations were obliged to transmit data when requested by the services.2 This attempt failed, because of the concerns of the Dutch Senate. After an evaluation of the act 7 years later, the commission Dessens concluded that there was the need to find a new balance between effective performances of the powers of the services on the one hand and securing the rule of law on the other hand (Rijksoverheid, 2013). In October 2016, another proposal to amend this law was submitted. The goal of this new act is, as explained in the memorandum, the modernization of the current act.3 The act is currently focused on tapping, receiving, recording and monitoring cable-bound and non-cable-bound telecommunication in a directed way (Wiv 2002, § 3.2.2, article 25). The non-specific tapping of cable-bound telecommunication is not permitted. Because of the increase of technological developments, the result of this restriction is that a large part of telecommunication cannot be used as a means by the intelligence services4. One of the crucial elements of this proposed new act is thus the possibility to tap non-specific cable-bound telecommunication (Wiv 2017, § 3.2.5.6.3, article 48-50).

The explanatory memorandum of the proposed law explains that the services inevitably infringe some civil rights, for example the right to privacy, by exercising their powers.5 Nevertheless, these infringements can be justified by law. According to Frissen (2016), the secrecy of the civilian (or in other words the privacy of a civilian) is not an absolute right. In case of a threat to the freedom of the civilian(s) or society, this right may be infringed (Frissen, 2016: 19).

In order to guarantee safety and security, the services play an important role. However, the prospect of the increase of power for the authorities to collect personal data of citizens has resulted in a national debate about privacy. Although citizens (among others some students from Amsterdam) agree with the purpose of the act – the prevention of terrorism and other threats to national security – the proposal has led to a request for a referendum about this act.

2 Parliamentary Papers II, 30 553, no. 2, 2006. 3 Parliamentary Papers II, 34 588, no. 3, 2016, p. 4. 4 Parliamentary Papers II, 34 588, no. 3, 2016, p. 8. 5 Parliamentary Papers II, 34 588, no. 3, 2016, p. 5-6. 2

Dutch law provides the opportunity to request for a referendum on a newly adopted act or treaty. A non-binding advisory referendum is held when there is a sufficient number of requests for a referendum: at least 10.000 requests in the preliminary stage and at least 300.000 requests in the final stage are needed (“Kiesraad”, n.d.). In the case of the Wiv, the Electoral Council received 384.126 valid requests for a referendum (“Kiesraad”, 2017a). Five students were mostly responsible for advocating and collecting requests for this referendum (Voskuil, 2017). Because of this referendum, the new act received many media attention. Opponents and proponents expressed their opinions in the media about the prospect of the new law. By doing so, multiple frames about the act appeared in the media. A theory which can be used to explain certain frames is the framing theory of Entman (1993). This theory offers the opportunity to describe the ability for a text to communicate through certain frames.

Research question The following research question will examine which frames were used by the media:

How does the framing theory explain the influence of the Dutch media coverage from September 2017 until March 2018 concerning the new act ‘Wet op de inlichtingen- en veiligheidsdiensten’ (Wiv) on the referendum on this act?

The thesis will further be divided in four sub-questions which will all address a specific part of the research question:

1. What is framing? 2. How were the Dutch intelligence and security services previously viewed by the society? 3. What does the new act entail? 4. How is the act framed in the Dutch media?

Scientific and societal relevance In the time the initiators of the referendum were busy finding support for their cause, the media began with reporting about the act and its possible impact on citizens. The way the proponents and opponents frame the consequences of the act is important for the discussion about the ratio between justice and security. This research is scientifically relevant because of the lack of literature concerning the topic of security versus justice in the form of the current act. The

3 referendum was announced in 2017 and research on this topic is thus limited. While opponents of the act actively planned to campaign for their motives, the proponents of the act did not ask for the amount of subsidy for their campaigns as their opponents (NOS, 2018). Nevertheless, the group which can be identified as ‘neutrals’ got the most subsidy assigned for their campaigns (NOS, 2018). The way these proponents and opponents promoted their frames, and which frames were adopted by the media, is also relevant for this research, because these possible similar frames could provide an incentive for further research.

The research has societal relevance because the act was expected to partly enter into force during the debate and has eventually entered into force in May 2018. Furthermore, the act could influence the lives of citizens. It is therefore relevant to see how these influences are displayed in the media, which is a source of information and education for citizens. The frames in mass media are used by its receivers to interpret events (Scheufele, 1999: 105). Because of this influence, frames could possibly have an impact on the outcome of the referendum. While writing this thesis the referendum has already took place, this research can offer citizens insight into identification of frames concerning the security versus justice debate. This thesis will be able to determine whether there is a correlation between the outcome of the referendum and the dominant frames. By doing so, this finding could be used for further research in the future.

Reading guide After this introduction, the thesis will elaborate on the theoretical framework in the second chapter. The second chapter will provide an answer for the first sub-question by explaining the framing theory. Thereafter, the third chapter explains the methodology of this thesis, consisting of the sampling and analysis methods. In order to explain the characteristics of the Dutch intelligence and security services, the fourth chapter gives an overview of the conception of the Dutch intelligence and security services in society. The proposed changes of the new Wiv in contrast to the current law are described in the fifth chapter. The final sub-question is answered in the sixth chapter by assessing different media sources, defining which frames are used and analysing in which way frames can be identified in the Dutch media sources. Finally, the thesis concludes with answering the research question. In the appendix, an overview is given of the tasks and powers of the Dutch services according to Wiv 2002.

2. Theoretical framework

This research will use the framing theory to analyse and explain the media coverage of the act of the Wiv. In this chapter, the first sub-question “What is framing?” will be answered.

“Framing is a critical activity in the construction of social reality because it helps shape the perspectives through which people see the world.” (Hallahan, 1999: 207)

Framing The framing theory indicates that frames are used “to describe the power of a communicating text” (Entman, 1993: 51). Framing thus offers an inside into the way a person could be influenced or a person wants to influence others by communicating specific information. The words of Entman, ‘communicating text’, do not necessarily mean a written text, but can also be understood in the broad sense, for example a video or television programme. By using frames, a text can imply a certain meaning. Therefore, a frame can shape and influence the meaning and memory the public connects to certain information. In other words: “Frames reside in the specific properties of the news narrative that encourage those perceiving and thinking about events to develop particular understandings of them” (Entman, 1991: 7). By looking at the frames in the media, the effect and perspective of the text can be observed. The two key elements which are connected to frames are “selection” and “salience” (Entman, 1993: 52). The former means that certain aspects of an event are selected for the text. In other words, only some aspects of the event are represented. Salience explains that by selecting specific aspects, these selected aspects will be more noticeable. At the same time, the salience of these aspects could also result in the (the more or less purposively) negligence of other aspects. By making some aspects stand out, other aspects will be less visible or even invisible. The frames consist of the use of specific pictures and words to emphasize a narrative, for example by using specific words, metaphors, concepts or symbols (Entman, 1991: 7). The placement and repetition of these words could also contribute to the strength of the frames. On the other hand, the exclusion of certain aspects is also powerful, because omission strengthens the focus on other frames (Entman, 1993: 54). The consequence of these frames is that the receiver of the text associates the event with a particular understanding. In other words, the frames are able to guide the

5 thoughts of the receiver in a particular direction (Entman, 1993: 52). The frame will not only affect the memory and understanding of an event, it will also determine how people will act (Entman, 1993: 54). Frames are therefore also used to create and form the perception of the public about political topics (Semetko and Valkenburg, 2000: 94).

Functions and locations of framing There are four indicators which can be identified when applying the framing theory. These indicators are mentioned by Entman (1993: 52) and help to distinguish a frame. First of all, the definition of a problem or the description of the situation gives an overview of the characteristics of the situation. This definition also explains the costs and benefits of the situation (Entman, 1993: 52). Secondly, the description of the cause of the problem/situation defines the causes which created the situation. In order to interpret and understand the situation, a diagnose of the cause(s) can be reflected by the frame (Entman, 1993: 52). Furthermore, the moral understanding describes the evaluation of the situation and its effects. Finally, the last indicator looks into the proposed solutions or “treatment recommendation” (Entman, 1993: 52). The frame offers a justification for the solution and explains the possible effects of this treatment. These indicators are also defined as the functions of frames.

These frames can appear in different places of the process of communication. The first place is the person that communicates. This person (knowingly or unknowingly) decides the choice of words and is guided by its frames (Entman, 1993: 52). According to Entman and Rojecki (1993), there are seven explanations for the selection of specific information which the communicator chooses for a text, for instance emotions or the power to influence a policy (p. 156-157). The second and third places in the communication process are the text itself and the receiver of the text. The text includes several frames and the receiver’s way of thinking could or could not mirror these frames (Entman, 1993: 52). Finally, the last place is the culture. The culture reflects the frames in a specific social group (Entman, 1993: 53).

Specific frames While it is possible to identify frames that are inherent to a specific situation, there are also pre- existing frames. Semetko and Valkenburg (2000) mention five different frames: the conflict frame, human interest frame, responsibility frame, economic consequences frame and the morality frame. The first frame, the conflict frame, highlights conflict between actors with the aim to attract the audience’s attention (Semetko and Valkenburg, 2000: 95). The human interest

6 frame attracts the attention of the audience in a different way, namely by emphasizing the emotional side of an event or personalizing the situation. This frame could be differentiated in frames that represent specific emotions, for instance fear or anger, or explain how people are affected by an event. Moreover, the responsibility frame seeks to assign responsibility to public or private actors (for example the authorities). Furthermore, the economic consequences frame shows the economic results of an event for certain actors. At last, the morality frame reflects “religious tenets or moral prescriptions”, which is often reflected by the words of experts (Semetko and Valkenburg, 2000: 96). While all of these frames have been used in the media, the first two frames are the most common (Semetko and Valkenburg, 2000: 95-96).

Effects of framing As previously descripted, framing must be seen as a process and may have consequences for different levels of the communication process. De Vreese (2005) explains that frames which occur in the news are able to affect “learning, interpretation, and evaluation of issues and events” (p. 52). These effects can be established through multiple ways according to the framing literature. Firstly, there is a difference between so-called “belief importance” and “belief content” (De Vreese, Boomgaarden and Semetko, 2011: 182). The former concept describes that frames are able to make an alteration in the way an individual perceives the importance of an item by emphasizing certain aspects. The latter concept explains that frames might impose new aspects of an issue to an individual, which results in alteration of the belief of this person.

Furthermore, the concept of valence plays an important role in the process of framing and more importantly, the effects of framing. De Vreese, Boomgaarden and Semetko (2011) explain that “valenced news frames indicate inherent good and positive or bad and negative aspects” (p. 183). This means that valenced frames consist of features which are implicitly positive or negative. There is a variety in the strength of positivity or negativity of these aspects. The valence of frames influences the consequences of framing. De Vreese, Boomgaarden and Semetko (2011) have indicated that negative frames have a greater effect than positive frames (p. 194). News frames are able to affect cognitive reactions and attitudes because of the valence of these frames (De Vreese, Boomgaarden and Semetko, 2011: 183). Shah, Kwak, Schmierbach and Zubric (2004) define that frames in the media have “conditional effects on cognitive complexity” (p. 114). In other words, the frames might be able to enhance the process of acquisition of knowledge through perceiving and processing information. The researchers furthermore emphasize that a more complex human cognition has “attitudinal and behavioral

7 consequences” (Shah, Kwak, Schmierbach and Zubric, 2004: 117). Schuck and De Vreese (2006) focus in their research on the attitudinal consequences of frames in the news. The scholars found that frames could have an effect on the attitude of people for certain political issues. In their research, the scholars revealed that the both positive and negative frames in the news were able to affect the support of individuals towards a debate about the enlargement of the European Union (Schuck and De Vreese, 2006: 21).

Framing of referendums Other literature specifically explains framing in the news concerning referendums and the effect of these frames on the referendum. Frames are used in this sense to process information and are helpful for individuals to entangle difficult political items (Wettstein, 2012: 319). In his research, Wettstein (2012) explains that the salience and the accessibility of the frames are important aspects in relation to the adoption of frames by the public or individuals (p. 320). Moreover, the researcher emphasizes that the interpretation of an issue by the public is influenced by the accessibility of the frames during the discussion, whether the frames are applicable to the item and whether the frames are understandable for the public (Wettstein, 2012: 322). If, for example, these frames are not accessible, the awareness of the public of these frames will reduce (p. 322). The salience of frames in media sources also strongly influences the adoption. The result of the salience of frames in the media is that these frames are accessible and therefore induce the adoption of these frames by the public (Wettstein, 2012: 330).

Media is thus an important source for the explanation and determination of referendum issues. These frames are among others applied by journalists and politicians to promote different understandings of events (Dekavalla, 2016: 797). While frames of political issues develop and are represented in the media for several weeks or months (Wettstein, 2012: 320), De Vreese and Semetko (2004) pointed out that information sources had a notable influence on the opinion of individuals in the last weeks before the referendum in Denmark in 2000 (p. 712). In this referendum, concerning the introduction of the euro, a small majority of the voters voted against the euro. The presence of “negative evaluations of YES actors” and the increased presence of “NO actors” might stimulate a “NO vote” in the referendum (De Vreese and Semetko, 2004: 713). Furthermore, the NO actors were able to widen the scope of the topic concerning the referendum, which resulted in a contribution to the vote against the euro (De Vreese and Semetko, 2004: 714). The scholars emphasized that the YES actors would have been more successful in convincing the public of their point of view when they acknowledge the

8 interrelationship between the euro and other political domains. In other words, the negative aspects of the euro were given more depth by the connection to multiple different consequences and thus turning the debate into “a more fundamental ideological discussion” (De Vreese and Semetko, 2004: 715)

Another significant finding is the effect of positive frames on NO voters. This effect is connected to the theory that positive framing in the news would mobilize the opponents of the referendum topic (Schuck and De Vreese, 2009: 55). This theory is (amongst others) based on the prospect theory, which explains that “the probability of loss is overweighted” (in comparison to gain) when making decisions (Kahneman and Tversky, 1979: 285). In times of a referendum, the frames in news which promoted a “positive outcome” of the referendum would stimulate NO voters to vote against, in order to prevent the risk of this outcome (Schuck and De Vreese, 2009: 55). However, the reason for this mobilization is not necessarily connected to NO voters. In other words, there might by cases in which negative framing in the news might mobilize YES voters to bring out their vote. In the research of Schuck and De Vreese (2009), the frames about the referendum on the Dutch EU Constitution in 2005 were analysed. In this respect, a positive outcome of the referendum would possibly result in the introduction of a constitution for the European Union. A positive outcome would thus favour change and the introduction of something new. The mobilization of voters through adversary frames is caused by the desire “to protect the status quo” against - what the voters consider as - a threat (Schuck and De Vreese, 2009: 56). In the case of the Dutch EU Constitution referendum, a negative outcome of the referendum was not a significant risk for the YES voters because it would not make an alteration in the current situation (“status quo”) (Schuck and De Vreese, 2009: 56). The researchers emphasize that in some cases a negative outcome of the referendum would alter the status quo. They also emphasize that there is the possibility positive frames might also have a mobilizing effect on YES voters. In conclusion, their research supports the finding that the risk of “a potential change of the status quo” is an element which mobilizes voters whom are against this outcome (Schuck and De Vreese, 2009: 56).

In sum, both the general framing effects as the effects of framing on referenda show that negative frames in the media have significant consequences. While the salience and accessibility of frames play important roles in the adoption of frames by the public, previous studies have shown that both negative and positive frames are able to stimulate individuals to vote against the proposal in a referendum. The theoretical framework concerning framing in

9 this chapter will be used to explain the (sub-)research question(s). The indicators of Entman (1993), the predefined frames and the general framing effects as well as the effects on referendum will be used to clarify framing in the media concerning the new Wiv.

3. Methodology

The methodology of this research will be elaborated in this chapter. The objective of the research is to examine how the recent debate about the referendum and the legal act are reflected in the Dutch media coverage. In this qualitative study, the framing theory is an effective way to make a reflection of the role frames concerning the Wiv played in the media and the possible impact of these frames on the referendum. In order to improve the process of frame identification and analysis of media sources, the fifth chapter of this research will provide an overview of frames used by organizations and persons whom were dominant in the public debate and were mentioned in media sources. The following organizations and persons are taken into consideration: Amnesty International, Bits of Freedom, Privacy First, Free Press Unlimited, the AIVD, the former director of the MIVD Pieter Cobelens, former BVD director Arthur Docters van Leeuwen and former MIVD director Pieter Bindt.

Data sampling In this holistic single case study, the aim of the research is to reflect the frames that are used by the proponents, the opponents and media. The research will select different media sources which mention the act and the referendum. These sources will be selected between the timeframe of 1 September 2017 up to and including 21 March 2018. In September 2017, the Dutch Electoral Council announced that the requirement of 10.000 requests in the preliminary stage was reached (Kiesraad, 2017b). This achievement was the starting point of ‘the campaign’ for a referendum. The referendum took place on 21 March 2018. These two important moments have increased the media attention on the act and will therefore be guiding for selecting the data. The articles will be purposively sampled. Further requirements for the selected articles are that the articles mention the referendum and the act (in relation to the content of the act)6. These requirements and the sampling method guarantee that the indicators can be answered through analysis of the articles. In this way, this selection will ease the process of identifying frames because the content of the articles refers to the same information.

This study will use multiple sources. First, news articles will be analysed. Newspapers have a wide reach, because of their publications online, and focus on different groups in the population.

6 Letters from readers were excluded, in order to analyse the articles which were written by the journalist and/or columnists of the paper. 11

Furthermore, newspapers “have the facility to communicate rather more complex ideas” than media which is broadcasted (McNair, 2000: 136). Due to feasibility, this research will focus on the five national daily newspapers with the biggest circulation in the Netherlands The chosen newspapers are ‘Telegraaf’, ‘Algemeen Dagblad’, ‘NRC Handelsblad’, ‘Volkskrant’ and ‘Trouw’. These newspapers all represent a particular perspective and have a specific background. These five newspapers all have an amount of circulation of approximately or above 100.000 in 20177. The news articles of these five newspapers will be selected through sampling from Lexis Nexis and will be analysed through the method of media discourse analysis. Due to feasibility of this research, there is no possibility to analyse all newspapers and media sources. However, the five newspapers represent different perspectives and thus reflect a large part of the Dutch newspapers coverage.

Secondly, the research focuses on two other sources that contributed to the framing of act. The first source is television programmes. In this research, the television programmes ‘Zondag met Lubach’ and ‘College Tour’ were purposively sampled. The former programme broadcasted an episode about the Wiv on 1 October 2017. This episode largely contributed to the request for a referendum. The latter programme broadcasted an episode with the Director General of the AIVD Rob Bertholee on 21 January 2017. This episode was the first time the Director General publicly spoke about the new act. Moreover, both programmes were mentioned in several news articles.

The second source includes special websites. Since the announcement of the possibility for a referendum on the Wiv, several websites were made and created (often with financial support) in order to inform the public or steer them in a specific direction. Similar to the other media sources, these websites also communicated frames about the new act. The following three websites were selected for this research through the method of purposive sampling. Firstly, www.sleepwet.nl was created to obtain requests for a referendum. The website also shows the opinions of multiple political parties about the new act. Parties as SP, Partij voor de Dieren and Piratenpartij openly supported this website and request for a referendum8. These parties also

7 Numbers according to Nationaal Onderzoek Multimedia, retrieved from: http://www.nommedia.nl/Doelpagina-Artikellijst/2045/2285970/Nieuwe-publicatie-Oplagecijfers- 2017-Q1-t-m-2017-Q4.html 8 https://www.sleepwet.nl/index.html#support 12 promoted against the act through campaigns and videos9 10. Secondly, the website www.veiligheid-en-de-wiv.nl was mentioned in several news articles. Lastly, the website www.wiv-onderdeloep.nl will be analysed, which provides neutral comments and descriptions of the act. While more websites about the Wiv were created, this research will concentrate on these three websites because these sources all communicate the frames in a different way and were mentioned in other media sources.

Data analysis The analysis will be given per news item by assessing the following four indicators: description of the situation, description of causes, moral understanding and proposed solution(s) (Entman, 1993: 52). This research will focus on the third location in the communication process defined by the framing theory of Entman (1993: 52): the text itself. The researcher will therefore act as an (objective) receiver of the information. The research is both a deductive and an inductive study. Pre-existing frames are used (see table below), but the analysis is not solely based on these existing frames. When frames do not match the content, new frames can be identified.

Frames Example questions to identify the frames Conflict Does the text mention different sides or disagreement between different actors? (Semetko and Valkenburg, 2000: 98) Human interest Does the text mention how people are affected by an issue or refer to specific emotions? (Semetko and Valkenburg, 2000: 98) Responsibility Does the text speak of responsibility of the government or any other actors? (Semetko and Valkenburg, 2000: 98) Economic consequences Does the text mention economic effects such as financial losses/gains? (Semetko and Valkenburg, 2000: 98) Morality Does the text mention any references towards morality or a moral message? (Semetko and Valkenburg, 2000:98)

9 Video of SP accessible through: https://www.sp.nl/sleepwet 10 Video of Partij voor de Dieren accessible through: https://www.partijvoordedieren.nl/standpunt/zeg- nee-tegen-massale-bespieding-via-sleepwet 13

Internal and external validity As a guarantee for a high internal validity, this research will use different media sources and the method of media discourse analysis. The chosen newspapers all have a different background, perspective and the writing is from a different angle. Furthermore, the other media sources also have different purposes and reflect different interests and angles. This diversity will assure that these sources largely represent the national media coverage in the Netherlands. The framing theory of Entman is useful to assess these different newspapers and media sources in the same way. This theory provides indicators which help to measure and analyse the sources. However, the frames will be analysed through this research. This means that there is never absolute certainty that these frames will be interpreted in the same way by all the receivers of the texts/sources.

Because of the choice for a holistic single case study, external validity will be lower than the internal validity. The use of certain frames is sufficient to explain the specific characteristics of this case. However, the choice for a holistic single case study makes it hard to generalize the use of framing in every case. On the contrary, this research will provide insight on the use of framing of cases concerning important and controversial topics in society. A possible pitfall of the research is that the theory of framing only reflects one aspect of the possible influences on the discussion about the act. Another pitfall is that not all media sources can be analysed due to the lack of time and size of this research. The choice to follow specific ‘expressions’ in the media is based on feasibility. Nevertheless, this choice does not mean that every other media source identically reflects the same frames as one of these sources or articles. Every newspaper and media source is unique.

4. The Dutch intelligence and security services

The introduction of this thesis gave a short overview of the Dutch intelligence and security services: the General Intelligence and Security Service (AIVD) and the Military Intelligence and Security Service (MIVD). The chapter will answer the second sub-question ‘How were the Dutch intelligence and security services viewed by the society in the past?’. This chapter will elaborate on the characteristics and the frames used for the Dutch intelligence and security services (in particular the predecessor of the AIVD: the BVD) in the past.

The introduction of the new act is not the first time frames have been formed about the Dutch intelligence and security services. The services have previously been subjected to the concept of framing, especially the predecessor of the AIVD. The Binnenlandse Veiligheidsdienst (BVD) was established in 1949 and the service was, according to the founder of the service Louis Einthoven, mostly focused on the problems concerning communism (Engelen, 2010: 66). The nature of the intelligence services reflects secrecy which often results in speculation about and imaging of these services. De Graaff and Hijzen (2018) describe this consequence as the risk to be ‘doubly’ suspicious. According to them, a service which remains silent is by definition suspicious, let alone a services which secretly operates and has profound special powers. (p. 150). At a certain point, the approach of the BVD was labelled as “gedachtepolitie [thoughts police]” (De Graaf & Hijzen, 2018: 151). Throughout history, this label was not the only label which was used to describe the services.

Scepticism towards BVD Over the years, the scepticism in society towards the BVD has increased. In the first place, the organization performed an important role in the Cold War. In the first phase of the war (before the Cuban Missile Crisis), the majority of the Dutch society had an anti-communist mindset (Engelen, 2007: 17). However after the Cuban Missile Crisis, the fear for war gradually decreased. Furthermore, the communist threat appeared to be overestimated by the BVD (Engelen, 2007: 45). The decreasing aversion of communism in the Dutch population, in combination with the sense of unease about the confidentiality of the service, resulted in a critical attitude in society towards the service (Engelen, 2007: 67). While politics determined the necessity of the service, the confidentiality of the service only allows restricted democratic

15 control. Therefore, the service was labelled as “noodzakelijk kwaad [necessary evil]” (Engelen, 2007: 277).

Previous frames Due to this scepticism in society, the services have been connected to several metaphors over the past years. While an article of Hijzen (2018) only describes the most frequent metaphors used by outsiders and critics (p. 13), the author is able to divide the metaphors into four characters. The first character involves the frames which characterize the service as a “James Bond on wooden shoes” (Hijzen, 2018: 18). In accordance with this metaphor, the Dutch security service was seen as incompetent and clumsy. The security service as a “ruin” is the second character which symbolizes the security services as a remainder of the past (Hijzen, 2018: 18-19). According to this character, the service does not belong in this period and the views of the service are labelled as outdated. Furthermore, the third character marks the security as a “stowaway of the democracy” (Hijzen, 2018: 19). This character displays the service as an outlaw in the democratic state. Finally, the fourth character describes the service as “a state within a state” (Hijzen, 2018: 23). This character refers to the service as a very powerful, uncontrollable force. According to some frames of this character, the service creates its own work and manipulates society (Hijzen, 2018: 24). In his article, Hijzen (2018) indicates that the characters were reproduced. After being away for some time, multiple characters returned in the media throughout the years. This reoccurrence shows that the same metaphors were and can be used throughout history. Therefore, these frames might be presented again by the media in the run up to the referendum. The article proves that framing of (the work of) the Dutch services is not a new concept and will probably occur in the present day and future.

BVD as a dangerous organization In accordance with the ‘James Bond on wooden shoes’ metaphor of Hijzen, journalist Rudie van Meurs11 noticed that the public labelled the work of the BVD as “padvindersgedoe [scouts hassle]” (Van Meurs, 1978). However, Van Meurs believes that this label downplays the actual strength and impact of the service: he believes that the service is dangerous for the society. His view reflects Hijzen’s metaphor of the service as a stowaway in the democratic society. Van Meurs marks the service as “ondemocratisch instrument ter bescherming van de democratische

11 Rudie van Meurs is an investigative journalist and the former editor of Vrij Nederland which has a left-wing political orientation. 16 rechtsorde [undemocratic instrument to protect the democratic rule of law]” and this service thus does not belong in a democratic society (Van Meurs, 1978: 22-23).

According to the journalist, the BVD is everywhere, built from the “kleinste gehuchten [smallest hamlets]” in the Netherlands (Van Meurs, 1978: 34). In this way, the service expands its power and this results in “wildgroei en rechteloosheid [proliferation and lawlessness]” without the ability of the parliament to check the service (Van Meurs, 1978: 35). Examples of this expansion mentioned by the journalist are the indirect investigative power through delegation to the police (Van Meurs, 1978: 50) and the inclusion of retired civil servants whom are involved with “heimelijke activiteiten [stealthy activities]” (Van Meurs, 1978: 72). According to Van Meurs, this method provides the BVD the label of “Een ‘gestapo-achtig’ apparaat [a ‘gestapo-like’ apparatus]” (Van Meurs, 1978: 45). Several other incidents are mentioned which are included in “het mausoleum [the mausoleum]” of incidents and are used to characterize the service (Van Meurs, 1978: 147). Van Meurs emphasizes the dissatisfaction in society about the services with examples from different groups in society. Firstly, a pastor ascribes the word devilish to the BVD. According to the clergyman, the organization is “een duivelse organisatie [a devilish organization]” which uses the church to dig up dirt on people (Van Meurs, 1978: 116-117). However, Van Meurs notes that this kind of pastor is rare (p. 119) and the service is thus able to gather information through ecclesiastical institutions. Secondly, the example of future scientists, or in other words students, is used. The BVD cooperates with students and university in order to facilitate “de jacht op de wetenschapper van morgen [the hunting of the future scientist]” (Van Meurs, 1978: 121). The last example is related to the author himself. The journalist mentions that the BVD performs illegal practice by gathering information about him through the mayor’s office because of his profession. He describes the views of the services as “chicanes” (Van Meurs, 1978: 132). Furthermore, he accuses the BVD of abuse of journalistic relations and mentions that the service poses a threat to the freedom of speech (Van Meurs, 1978: 136). Overall, these examples show objections from multiple aspects in society against a service as the BVD. It is speculated that the service owns its existence to ‘self-summoned’ enemies and the creation of fear in society. The legitimacy of the service is even questioned, due to the disagreement in parliament about the BVD (Van Meurs, 1978: 182). While these frames emphasize and reflect the negative interpretations and critics about the BVD, it should be noted that these frames were largely carried out by a part of the society which were often targets of the service and were mostly left-winged political oriented.

5. The new Intelligence and Security Services Act

This chapter will explain the proposed new Intelligence and Security Services Act and provides an answer for the third sub-question ‘What does the new act entail?’. Firstly, the chapter discusses the development of the act. Thereafter, some differences between the Wiv 200212 and the new act will be illustrated. Due to the feasibility of this research, this chapter will only discuss the articles of the act which have been often criticized and are mentioned in the public discussion. Finally, summaries of the views about the new act of five influential organizations and three persons are given: Amnesty International, Bits of Freedom, Privacy First, Free Press Unlimited, the AIVD, Pieter Cobelens, Arthur Docters van Leeuwen and Pieter Bindt. These organizations were especially dominant in the public discussion about the new act and were therefore frequently mentioned in the media.

Formulating a new proposal since 2006 Since the current act is from 2002 and thus fifteen years old13, the main reason for a new act is modernization. On the other hand, the new act aims to strengthen the constitutional guarantees according to the memorandum14. The act has the goal, for instance, to offer more transparency and to improve the supervision. Since 2006, there have been plans to reform the Wiv 2002. After evaluation of the Wiv 2002, the Commission Evaluation Intelligence and Security Services Act (Commission Dessens) concluded in 2013 that the act needed modernization in order to reach a balance between national security and constitutional guarantees (Commission Dessens, 2013: 44). The Commission explains that the current system of collecting data through telecommunication is not sufficient anymore. The current powers are not adequate to serve the goal of national security and the act needs revision of the legal guarantees (Commission Dessens, 2013: 78). At the same time, the Commission proposes consolidation of the supervision, mainly in advance. (Commission Dessens, 2013: 173). Different suggestions are made to improve the supervision. Firstly, the commission recommends the permission of the Minister for the deployment of the power to enter an automated work and immediate supervision of the CTIVD (Commission Dessens, 2013: 172). Another recommendation is to give an account to the motion Franken which includes multiple benchmarks for the formulation

12 An overview of the tasks and powers of the services in the Wiv 2002 is in the appendix of this research. 13 Counted from 2002 until last year (2017), when the referendum was proposed. 14 Parliamentary Papers II, 34 588, no. 3, 2016, p. 5-6. 18 of a new act. Furthermore, the Commission recommends binding power for the decisions of the CTIVD about legitimacy of the special powers (Commission Dessens, 2013: 173).

In comparison to the act of 2002, the new act is more extensive. The act largely includes regulation which is written down explicitly, but was already used under the act of 2002. The articles which received the most critics and attention will be discussed.

The collection of data The new act includes both an expansion of powers and strengthening of guarantees. An example of an expansion is the authorisation of the services to request information from other telecommunication providers instead of the limitation of public telecommunication providers (Wiv 2017, §3.2.5.6.4, article 51). The explanation for this expansion is included in the memorandum, which describes that the ‘immense’ increasement of use and quantity of communication-services has caused this expansion15. Another example is the power to non- specifically tap from cable-bound telecommunication. The new act does not include the restriction for the services to non-specifically tap information from cable-bound telecommunication. The difference between cable-bound telecommunication and non-cable- bound telecommunication is not mentioned in the new act (Wiv 2017, § 3.2.5.6.3, article 48- 50). According to Dielemans (2018), the form of information does not change, but solely a new medium is included (p. 73). The argument for this enlargement is based on the Commission Dessens. The memorandum describes that that the act does not live up to the necessary powers concerning national security16. Furthermore, the new act introduces a DNA-database (Wiv 2017, § 3.2.5.3, article 43)17. The memorandum of the act explains the necessity of preservation of DNA. According to the memorandum, DNA-profiles had a vital role in the identification of the perpetrators of the Paris attacks in 201518.

The old act did not include all requirements which the European Court of Human Rights (EHRM) imposed concerning the right to privacy mentioned in article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (EVRM). This right allows, in some cases, the infringement of the right to privacy when the infringement is necessary to serve the interests of national security.

15 Parliamentary Papers II, 34 588, no. 3, 2016, p. 83. 16 Parliamentary Papers II, 34 588, no. 3, 2016, p. 91. 17 Parliamentary Papers II, 34 588, no. 3, 2016, p. 69. 18 Parliamentary Papers II, 34 588, no. 3, 2016, p. 72. 19

In order to meet these requirements, the new act includes some new guarantees. The new act includes the guarantees that data will be examined in order to establish the relevancy of the data, the irrelevant data will be destroyed and the data will be retained for a period of one year (Wiv 2017, § 3.2.1, article 27). Data obtained through tapping, monitoring, receiving and recording of telecommunication has a retainment period of three years (Wiv 2017, § 3.2.5.6.3, article 48(5) and 48(6)).This retainment period is extended to three years, because the retainment period of one year was experienced as a bottleneck as explained in the memorandum19. Moreover, the act introduces a new Review Board for the Exercise of Investigatory (TIB). This board examines the legitimate execution of a power prior to the execution if the act requires the permission of the Minister for the deployment of this special power (Wiv 2017, § 3.2.2.1, article 32). The decision of the board is binding, which will result in the cancellation of the Minister’s permission if the board decides that the execution of the power is not legitimate (Wiv 2017, § 3.2.2.2, article 36(3)). Furthermore, the CTIVD will still be authorised to handle complaints. This committee will introduce a new department which will decide on filed complaints (Wiv 2017, § 7.2.3, article 114). The explanatory memorandum emphasizes that the decisions of the new department of the CTIVD are binding20. This specific department of the CTIVD replaces the National Ombudsman. Finally, the new act offers guarantees for the use of special powers against journalists and lawyers, if the execution of the power might lead to acquirement of data concerning the source of the journalist or the confidential communication between the lawyer and its client. In that case, the court of The Hague has to give permission according to article 30(2) and article 30(3) (Wiv 2017, § 3.2.1, article 30). According to the memorandum of the act, the introduction of the TIB, the complaints review by the CTIVD and the specific procedure concerning journalists and lawyers are adapted to the requirements of EVRM and EHRM21.

Cooperation between (foreign) intelligence and security services The Dutch services should take several aspects into consideration before the services are able to cooperate with other foreign intelligence and security services, for instance professionalism and respect for civil rights in the foreign country (Wiv 2017, § 6.2, article 88). According to the memorandum, cooperation with other services is defined as “onmisbaar [indispensable]”22.

19 Parliamentary Papers II, 34 588, no. 3, 2016, p. 100. 20 Parliamentary Papers II, 34 588, no. 3, 2016, p. 180. 21 Parliamentary Papers II, 34 588, no. 3, 2016, p. 17, 171 & 48. 22 Parliamentary Papers II, 34 588, no. 3, 2016, p. 7. 20

Provision of data which is not (yet) evaluated needs the permission of the Minister (Wiv 2017, § 6.2, article 89(2)). Foreign services are not authorised to collect data in the Netherlands on their own initiative. Moreover, the act regulates the request for support of other foreign services (Wiv 2017, § 6.2, article 90). The article guarantees that the services can only request for support when the requested support matches a power listed in the act (Wiv 2017, § 6.2, article 90(5)).

Organizations and persons about the new Act Due to these new powers and guarantees, the new act received many attention. Some organizations had a strong presence in the public discussion about the act and/or the referendum. An organization which has been present since the consultation phase of the proposal is Amnesty International. The organization is not a proponent of the new act. In their advice to the government, Amnesty wrote “In een democratische rechtsstaat zoals Nederland kan het nooit noodzakelijk zijn om de gehele bevolking onder communicatie-surveillance te plaatsen. [It could never be necessary to put the entire population under communication surveillance in a democratic constitutional state like the Netherlands]” (Amnesty International, 2015: 1). These words indicate that the proposed act will result in surveillance of the whole Dutch population. Furthermore, the organization refers to the revelations of Edward Snowden about governments and refers to expertise (among others the United Nations) to support its statement that the new act invades human rights (Amnesty International, 2015: 2). Amnesty adopts the term “sleepnet [dragnet]” in order to clarify its point of view about the collection of all forms of telecommunication (Amnesty International, 2015: 3). Two years later, the organization is still present in the public discussion and still uses this metaphor. Amnesty used the word “sleepwet [drag act]” for the act (Amnesty International, n.d.). The organization claims that the privacy of civilians is at stake and that this privacy will not be respected by the services. Amnesty also states that the act allows the sharing of data with countries which will use this data to oppress, discriminate or prosecute certain groups in society (for instance homosexuals) (Amnesty International, n.d.).

Another organization which has been present since the beginning is the organization Bits of Freedom. This organization has also consulted the government during the consultation phase and uses the word ‘sleepnet [dragnet]’ frequently in its advise (Bits of Freedom, 2015). The organization critically analyses the act and describes (among other things) the power to enter automated work through interference of a third automated work as very risky and

21 disproportional (Bits of Freedom, 2015: 15-16). During the months prior to the referendum, the organization actively campaigned against the new act. On its website, Bits of Freedom uses “surveillancewet [surveillance act]” and “sleepwet [drag act]” as synonyms for the act (Bits of Freedom, n.d.). Together with the organization Free Press Unlimited (and Internet Society), the organizations launched the website geensleep.net. A remarkable finding is that both the website geensleep.net and Amnesty International support their point of view with the example of online searching for the word ‘jihad’ (Amnesty International, n.d.; Bits of Freedom, Free Press Unlimited and Internet Society, n.d.). According to the organizations, the act would result in self-censorship due to fear. Furthermore, the website states that this act makes it impossible for journalists to protect their source. Free Press Unlimited indicates that the act will have a disastrous effect for journalists, because the act will restrain citizens from sharing crucial stories with social relevance. The organization refers to stories similar to the Panama Papers (Free Press Unlimited, n.d.)

The organization Privacy First also uses ‘sleepwet [drag act]’ as a synonym for the new act. The organization fears that the privacy of citizens will be infringed and expresses that the data of “onschuldige burgers [innocent citizens]” should not be collected by the services, because this could lead to false positives (Privacy First, 2018). Privacy First writes on its website that the Dutch services are not able to supervise the data when the data are shared with other countries. The new act would result in a “chilling effect” on the practice of the right to privacy according to the organization (Privacy First, 2018). The organization also states that the Dutch government releases fake news about the act and the government has “hongerlust [appetite]” for data (Privacy First, 2018). The website further criticises the TIB, which is described as dependent and “stempelmachine [stamping machine]” (Privacy First, 2018).

In contrary to the other organizations, the AIVD is (as could be expected) a proponent of the new act. According to the service, the world has deteriorated since the Wiv 2002 came into force. The service’s website states that the services are currently unable to timely notice (terrorist) threats and due to this shortcoming, the services will be unable to protect national security (AIVD, n.d.). According to the AIVD, the new act will provide a solution for this problem and provides guarantees for the protection of personal data conform national and international rulings.

The former director of the MIVD, Pieter Cobelens, labels the term “onschuldige mensen [innocent people]” which is used by opponents of the act as “karikatuur die de tegenstanders scheppen [caricature created by opponents]” (Voor de Ommekeer TV, 2018). Cobelens debunks the arguments of organizations (for instance Bits for Freedom) which proclaim that the new act allows the tapping of telecommunication of a whole city in order to see whether something is ‘going on’. According to the former MIVD director, this imaging is “onzin [nonsense]” and the new act imposes “nieuwe extra veiligheden [new extra securities]” (Voor de Ommekeer TV, 2018). By using the words “stomme referendum [stupid referendum]”, Cobelens expresses his opinion about the referendum. He explains that the referendum stops the services from maximally utilizing their powers and establishing security. The privacy matter is “flauwekul [baloney]” and privacy does not exist anymore according to Pieter Cobelens (Voor de Ommekeer TV, 2018). He substantiates his argument by saying that private companies use their cameras to record civilians without ‘sufficient’ regulation.

The former BVD director Arthur Docters van Leeuwen also supports the new act. In a broadcast of the Dutch television programme WNL op Zondag, Docters van Leeuwen debunks the commentary of the host whom labels the collection of data of ‘innocent citizens’ as extensive. According to the BVD director, the country copes with a “omgekeerd problem [converse problem]” which is caused by digitalisation (Nieman, 2017). He mentions that the services will not hold on to irrelevant data, because this is “een belasting voor de dienst [a burden for the service]” and the services “geen bal aan hebben [the data are not useful for the services]” (Nieman, 2017). Another guest of the show, Annemarie Jorritsma, confirms his arguments by saying that the act is very complicated and is labelled incorrectly. Docters van Leeuwen furthermore mentions the consequence if the act will not enter into force. He describes the “digitale gat [digital gap]” which will increase and as a consequence, the services are not able to provide a “begin van garantie [start of guarantee]” to notice attacks. The risk of attacks thus increases (Nieman, 2017). According to the former director, another consequence is that Dutch military personnel whom are dispatched to foreign countries will risk to die.

Pieter Bindt, another former director of the MIVD, agrees that the new act is necessary in order to “dreigingen tijdig te zien [timely notice threats]” (Bindt, 2018). Bindt explains that the services’ confidentiality is necessary by labelling it as sensible secrecy. The former director mentions that he has confidence in the professionalism of the services and stresses that the services have “te beperkt zicht [too limited sight]” due to the current act. The consequence is

23 according to Bindt as follows: “Tijdig onderkennen en begrijpen van dreiging loopt daarmee gevaar [This poses a danger to timely recognizing and understanding a threat]” and “Daarbij zien ze veel foute signalen [they see many false signals]” (Bindt, 2018). Furthermore, he debunks the argument of the opponents whom state that whole neighbourhoods will be subjected to surveillance because this method is disproportionate and non-subsidiary. Bindt advises to vote for the new act, because the act imposes ‘a good balance’ between tasks, powers and guarantees.

In order to clarify the views of the mentioned persons/organizations, the following table will offer an oversight of the used frames per critized aspect of the act.

Aspect of the act Frames Non-specific Amnesty International interception of * Human interest frame (privacy at stake, surveillance and terms as cable-bound ‘sleepnet [dragnet]’ indicate the impact on humans) telecommunication * Morality frame (infringement of right to privacy according to United Nations institutions)

Bits of Freedom and Free Press Unlimited * Human interest frame (among others the reference to emotion fear and human impact)

Privacy First * Human interest frame (impact on privacy) * Morality frame (this frame is representated by the moral prescripition that data of innocent civilians should not be collected) * Almighty government frame (this frame labels the government as powerful and unfaithful by writing that the government releases fake news and is eager to collect data)

AIVD * Human interest frame (indicated by the words ‘unable to timely notice terrorists’ and ‘protect national security’)

* Necessity frame (the new act offers a solution according to the organization and is thus necessary)

Pieter Cobelens * Human interest frame (‘privacy does not exist’) * Necessity frame (indicated by the words ‘sufficient regulation’) * Exaggeration frame (this frame reflects that other organization exaggerate when describing the scenario of tapping whole neighbourhoods)

Arthur Docters van Leeuwen * Human interest frame (human impact and referral to fear by saying that without the act military personel will risk to die and risk of attacks) * Necessity frame (‘digital gap’) * Exaggeration frame (mentioning that the label of innocent people is extensive)

Pieter Bindt * Human interest frame (human impact is indicated by the words as ‘danger’) * Necessity frame (mentioning the necessity of the act) * Morality frame (indicates that the services follow the law by using terms as ‘disproportionate’ and ‘non-subsidiary’) Sharing data with Amnesty International other (foreign) * Human interest frame (indicating that sharing data will result in the services oppression and discrimination of people according to Amnesty)

Privacy First * Human interest frame (impact on privacy) Entering Bits of Freedom and Free Press Unlimited automated work * Morality frame (the word ‘disproportional’ indicates the moral prescription of this power)

Introduction of the Privacy First TIB * Insuffiency frame (the new Board is labelled as insufficient through the name ‘stamping machine’) Data from Free Press Unlimited journalists * Human interest frame (the power will have ‘a disastrous effect’ for journalists)

Overall, these different actors communicate frames and express the actors’ points of view. While the first four organizations frame the image of the services which gather as much data as possible at the cost of citizens’ privacy, the last organization and persons emphasize that this new act is necessary for the protection of the country. The frames mainly focus on the power to tap non-specific cable-bound telecommunication. The following chapter will analyse the appearance of frames concerning this new act in the media. Due to the media attention these organizations and persons received, some frames might be reproduced and/or reoccur in the media.

6. Frames in the media

In this chapter, different media sources will be analysed in order to identify (pre-existing) frames. Firstly, the newspapers Algemeen Dagblad, Telegraaf, NRC Handelsblad, Trouw and Volkskrant will be assessed. Thereafter, indicators and frames of two television broadcasts are discussed. Lastly, the analysis of three influential websites is given.

6.1 Newspapers 6.1.1 Algemeen dagblad This research analysed ten articles from the newspaper Algemeen Dagblad. The following indicators and frames were reflected and identified.

6.1.1.1 Indicators Description of the situation The articles in Algemeen Dagblad use different descriptions for the situation concerning the new act. Almost every analysed article of this newspaper uses the term ‘sleepwet [drag act]’ as a synonym for the act in combination with the formal name of the act. Another equivalent which is used is the term “aftapwet [drain act]” (Oosterhof, 2017, October 6: 10; Hoedeman & Winterman, 2018, March 3: 3). An exception is the interview with the party leader of the Dutch political party Christen-Democratisch Appèl (CDA) Sybrand Buma whom mentions the official name of the act (Kok & Van Soest, 2017, November 25: 4-5). According to Van Soest, the new act caused many “onrust [unrest]” within society (Van Soest, 2017, November 2: 26). On the other hand, some articles emphasize the situation prior to the public discussion about the act, in particular the acceptation of the act by the Parliament. The articles describe the situation in which the Senate accepted the act “vrij geruisloos [silently]” (Voskuil, 2017, October 9: 10) and was about to enter into force “zonder veel reuring [without much commotion]” (Rosman, 2018, March 17: 12). According to one of the initiators of the referendum, this situation was labelled as “echt heel raar [really strange]”, because the act already received many critics from “gerenommeerde [reputable]” organizations (Rosman, 2018, March 17: 12).

Description of causes Most articles describe that the introduction of the new act is caused by the insufficiency of the current act from 2002. According to the government and the services, the act is necessary for

27 the prevention of criminality, in particular terrorism (Oosterhof, 2017, October 6: 10; Voskuil, 2017, October 9: 10). The proponents of the new act speak of the “modernisering [modernization]” of the current act (Rosman & Winterman, 2018, March 21: 8) and the old act as a “belemmering [obstruction]” for the services to protect the nation (Van Soest, 2017, November 2: 26). On the other hand, the opponents of the act also mention that the adjustment of the old act is necessary (Hoedeman & Winterman, 2018, March 3: 3; Rosman & Winterman, 2018, March 21: 8). Winterman & Rosman (2018, March 15) emphasize that the new act is necessary for regulation of the services and that the services “klagen [complain]” about their current powers (p. 8).

Moral understanding The consequences of the act mentioned in Algemeen Dagblad show some similarities. The newspaper paints the picture of services (while referring to Arjen Lubach) which “hele wijken (…) aftappen [tap whole neighbourhoods]” if a suspect lives in the neighbourhood or if these services want to track down a “Syriëganger23” (Oosterhof, 2017, October 6: 10; Voskuil, 2017, October 9: 10). The director of Amnesty International labels the act as “onnodige schending van privacy [unnecessary violation of privacy]” and a member of the House of Representatives of the party Groenlinks, Kathalijne Buitenweg, mentions that “alle Nederlanders [all Dutch people]” shall be tapped by the services (Rosman & Winterman, 2018, March 21: 9). She further explains in an interview that the act does not reflect the guarantees as promised by the government (Hoedeman & Winterman, 2018, March 3: 3). Furthermore, the term “onschuldige [innocent]” persons/citizens is often used by both proponents and opponents of the Wiv. The opponents use the words to emphasize (in their opinion) profound consequences of the act (Hoedeman & Winterman, 2018, March 3: 3; Winterman & Rosman, 2018, March 15: 8; Rosman, 2018, March 17: 12). The proponents, on the other hand, debunk this frame by saying the services are not interested in their data (Hoedeman & Winterman, 2018, March 17: 13) and the new act will prevent that these persons will die (Van Soest, 2017, November 2: 26). According to the minister of the Interior Kajsa Ollongren, the services can be trusted due to the guarantees in the Wiv (Hoedeman & Winterman, 2018, March 17: 13). However, Akyol (2018, March 20) describes that both the opponents and the proponents seem to emphasize that the referendum about this act is a choice between “particuliere privacy [private privacy]” and “nationale veiligheid [national security]” (p. 2)

23 A person whom leaves to the conflict in Syria. 28

Proposed solution(s) Articles could also propose a solution to solve the current situation. Solutions in the articles of Algemeen Dagblad were mostly proposed by the opponents of the new act. The opponents emphasize that the act has to reflect more guarantees (Rosman & Winterman, 2018, March 21: 9). According to Kathalijne Buitenweg, the solution for the situation is a new act: “reparatiewet [repair act]” (Hoedeman & Winterman, 2018, March 3: 3). Furthermore, multiple articles mention the referendum as a solution. The initiators of the referendum describe the referendum as “noodrem [emergency brake]” and professor Wim Voermans refers to this solution as “zwaar geluid [heavy sound]” against the act (Oosterhof, 2017, October 6: 10). However, Akyol (2018, March 20) disagrees with the referendum as a reaction to the situation. He stresses that a referendum is not useful unless citizens are provided with complete information. According to him, a new improved referendum is the solution (Akyol, 2018, March 20: 2).

6.1.1.2 Frames In the ten analysed articles of Algemeen Dagblad, the following frames were identified.

Conflict Every analysed article of Algemeen Dagblad referred to the conflict frame in a way. The articles reflect two parties: the opponents and the proponents of the new act. While some articles directly mark these parties as “voor [for]” or “tegen [against]” the act (Rosman & Winterman, 2018, March 21: 8-9), other articles labelled the parties as the services and innocent civilians (Winterman & Rosman, 2018, March 15: 8-9) or “kabinet [cabinet]” and multiple parties in the House of Representatives (Hoedeman & Winterman, 2018, March 3: 3). However, one article emphasizes that this dichotomy is more complex as it appears (Akyol, 2018, March 20: 2).

Human interest The human interest frame is reflected by an appeal to emotions and explaining the human impact of a situation. An example in the articles is the term ‘sleepwet [drag act]’. By labelling the act as such, the users suggest that the services gather all kind of data from citizens. This is further explained by the use of words as “hele wijken aftappen [tapping whole neighbourhoods]” and “onschuldige mensen [innocent people]” (Voskuil, 2017, October 9: 10). These words indicate that people are greatly affected by the act. Moreover, the arguments of the proponents are described by opponents as putting the emphasis on the emotion fear: “angst

29 voor terreur [fear of terror]” (Rosman, 2018, March 17: 12). The proponents, on the other hand, mention that the new act helps to counteract terrorism and will prevent innocent people from dying (Van Soest, 2017, November 2: 26).

Responsibility The responsibility frame assigns responsibility for actors or authorities. In Algemeen Dagblad, this frame is less dominant. According to Van Soest (2017, November 2), the government has to campaign seriously for the act and the opponents of the Wiv have to be honest about the need for more powers (p. 26). On the other hand, Kathalijne Buitenweg assigns responsibility to the government concerning another aspect. She mentions that the government needs to live up to its commitments (“toezeggingen”) and has to make sure the act includes these guarantees (Hoedeman & Winterman, 2018, March 3: 3). According to Akyol (2018, March 20: 2), the government already took its responsibility by abolishing the referendum.

Morality The morality frame is also used in Algemeen Dagblad. As mentioned before, Van Soest summons the opponents of the act to be honest about the necessity of the powers (Van Soest, 2017, November 2: 26). Another example of this frame is the reference to legitimacy. When the minister of Interior is asked whether the civilians should trust the services, she answers that the services perform their work conform the act and the guarantees of the act make sure that the services do not misuse their powers: “we zijn een democratische rechtstaat en deze wet schept goede kaders waarin is vastgelegd wanneer een dienst bijzondere bevoegdheden mag inzetten. (…) De diensten werken binnen de wet. [we are a democratic constitutional state and this act creates sufficient frameworks in which the special powers of the service are captured. (…) The services follow the act.]” (Hoedeman & Winterman, 2018, March 17: 13). Furthermore, opponents mention that organizations as “de Raad van State, het College voor de Rechten van de Mens en de Raad voor de Rechtspraak [The Council of State, The Netherlands Institute for Human Rights and The Council for the Judiciary]” criticized the new act (Voskuil, 2017, October 9: 10) and these organizations are labelled as “gerenommeerde [reputable]” organizations (Rosman, 2018, March 17: 12).

Other frames Insufficiency In the articles, a frequently mentioned new frame was identified. This frame is labelled as insufficiency frame due to claims of the opponents that the act unnecessarily infringes the right to privacy of civilians (Rosman & Winterman, 2018, March 21: 9) and offers too little guarantees. According to them, the lack of guarantees makes it possible to “massaal [massively]” tap the communication of citizens (Hoedeman & Winterman, 2018, March 3: 3). Winterman and Rosman (2018, March 15) ascribe that the services already have many profound powers which make it able to “[in] ‘echte levens’ te wroeten [grub in‘real lives’]” (p.8). These words do not explicitly mention the insufficiency of the act, but the words do indicate that the act does not meet the necessary requirements according to the opponents of the act. The terms ‘sleepwet [drag act]’ and ‘sleepnet [dragnet]’ are also used for this frame to describe the profound consequences.

Necessity Another new frame is the necessity frame. This frame is also dominant in the articles of Algemeen Dagblad. As mentioned in ‘description of causes’, the act concerning the services needs modernization. The nation needs protection and the current act is an obstruction to achieve this goal according to Van Soest (2017, November 2: 26). Both the opponents and the proponents of the act mention that a new law is “nodig [necessary]” (Rosman & Winterman, 2018, March 21: 8-9). According to Sybrand Buma, the improved Wiv enables to find “een speld in een hooiberg [a needle in a haystack]” (Kok & Van Soest, 2017, November 25: 5).

Exaggeration The following frame occurred less frequently in the articles. However, the frame portrayed an important vision which was mentioned by mostly proponents of the act. The exaggeration frame displays the other part (in this case the opponents of the act) as people whom exaggerate their point of view. Van Soest mentions this frame by disregarding the term ‘sleepwet [drag act]’. According to him, the opponents create a “karikatuur [caricature]” by labelling the services as “Big Brother” (Van Soest, 2017, November 2: 26). Sybrand Buma debounces the arguments of the opponents by saying that they put too much emphasis on privacy: “overdreven sterke nadruk op privacy [overly strong emphasis on privacy]” (Kok & Van Soest, 2017, November 25: 5). In this interview, he explains that privacy is important, however the opponents are overdoing their statements. Akyol (2018, March 20), which identifies himself as neither an opponent nor

31 a proponent, states that opponents frame the far-fetched image of the new act when they refer to the book 1984 of George Orwell (p. 2).

Ignorance The last frame found in the articles is the ignorance frame. The ignorance frame is connected to unfamiliarity with the new act and its consequences. This frame was communicated by two articles. Firstly, Akyol describes the act as “complexe materie [complex matter]” (Akyol, 2018, March 20: 2). According to him, the opponents and proponents tend to display the referendum on the new act as a choice between privacy and national security, but Akyol describes this choice as more complicated. The columnist writes that civilians cannot make a proper decisions without all relevant information (Akyol, 2018, March 20: 2). This argument is elaborated on by Rosman and Winterman (2018, March 21: 8-9). These writers also mention the ignorance among citizens about the content of the new law. They blame the services for this ignorance, due to the secrecy of their work. According to them, the service are not willing to share any information about its “eigen modus operandi [own modus operandi]” (Rosman & Winterman, 2018, March 21: 8).

6.1.1.3 Conclusion The analysed articles in Algemeen Dagblad impose multiple frames. Most articles used the term ‘sleepwet [drag act]’ to describe the act and the causes were described as the modernization of the act. The description of the moral consequences of the act differed. The opponents mentioned the great violation of the privacy of innocent citizens, while the proponents debunked these arguments. Finally, the opinions about the referendum as a solution for the situation were varied. The most dominant frames are the conflict frame, human interest frame, necessity frame and insufficiency frame. On the other hand, minor frames are the responsibility frame, morality frame, exaggeration frame and ignorance frame. These frames were mentioned to a lesser extent. The articles did not reflect the economic consequences frame.

6.1.2 Telegraaf This research analysed sixteen articles from the newspaper Telegraaf. The following indicators and frames were reflected and identified.

6.1.2.1 Indicators Description of the situation In order to describe the situation concerning the new act, most analysed articles in Telegraaf refer to the act as ‘sleepwet [drag act]’. This metaphor focuses on one aspect of the new act, which is described as “sleepnet [dragnet]” (Telegraaf, 2018a, March 17). This metaphor was also reflected in combination with the new act: “sleepnetwet [dragnet act]” (Telegraaf, 2017a, October 10: 2). Other synonyms for this metaphor were reflected as “aftapwet [drain act]” (Telegraaf, 2017, November 2: 4), “tapwet [tap act]” (Telegraaf, 2018a, March 17) and “afluisterreglement [eavesdrop regulation]” (Hoogland, 2018, March 20: 5). Furthermore, a new synonym for the Wiv was reflected in an article which gave insight into the work of the services. The reporter of Telegraaf referred to the new act as “spionagewet [espionage act]” and “spionnenwet [spies act]” (Telegraaf, 2018, March 10: 26).

Description of causes While the news articles from Telegraaf impose similar causes for the current situation, the descriptions about these causes are reflected in different words. According to an employee of the AIVD, the service “vecht met één hand op de rug [fights with one hand on the back]” (Telegraaf, 2018, March 10: 26). Telegraaf states that there have been changes concerning the technology since the introduction of the current act in 2002 (Telegraaf, 2018, March 19: 8). The newspaper indicates that these developments have caused the inadequacy of the old act (Telegraaf, 2018a, March 17). The Director General of the AIVD Rob Bertholee puts more emphasis on the inadequacy of the old act by saying that the old act qualifies as “hopeloos achterhaald [hopelessly obsolete]” (Telegraaf, 2018b, March 17). Other articles impose the contribution to (national) security as a cause for the new act (Telegraaf, 2018a, March 21: 11; Telegraaf, 2018b, March 21).

Moral understanding The articles ascribe several effects and implications to the act. In one of its articles, the newspaper represents a neutral description of the Wiv by stating the act imposes “meer mogelijkheden om informatie te onderscheppen [more opportunities to intercept information]” (Telegraaf, 2017, November 1: 6). The CTIVD seems content with the new act. The committee notices a sufficient balance in the act: “„in voldoende mate” recht wordt gedaan aan de belangen van zowel de nationale veiligheid als de rechtsbescherming van de burger [,,suffienctly” does justice to the interests of both national security and the legal protection of the civilian]”

(Telegraaf, 2018, February 27). The CTIVD mentions that the act strengthens the legal position of civilians. On the other hand, opponents of the Wiv stress the impact of the act, or in their words “aantasting van de privacy [degradation of the privacy]” (Telegraaf, 2018, February 27; Telegraaf, 2018, March 3). While some political parties claim that the safety of the Dutch military in foreign countries is in danger without the act (Telegraaf, 2018b, March 21), another article in the newspaper displays that security experts believe the act increases the risk of hacks, in particular if data are shared with British and American security services which have “een rijke geschiedenis van datalekken [a rich history of data leaks]” (Telegraaf, 2018c, March 17). Moreover, the Big Brother metaphor is mentioned twice. In his column, Schuckink Kool (2018, March 13) connects the “Big Brother-maatschappij [Big Brother-society]” to a discussion about privacy versus security concerning the new Wiv. However, both Schuckink Kool (2018, March 13) and Hoogland (2018, March 20: 5) agree that China nowadays more explicitly deploys the Big Brother concept. Another article of the newspaper displays that the act might impose ‘a future danger’: “Op een dag zal deze Sleepwet tegen ons ingezet worden omdat we, bijvoorbeeld, ouderwetse ideeën hebben over man-vrouwverhoudingen of over wat dan ook dat activistische elites onaanvaardbaar vinden [One day the drag act will be used against us, because we, for example, have oldfashioned ideas about gender balance or whatever the activist elite labels as unacceptable]” and “Nog even, en Orwells 1984 is een feit [In a while, Orwells 1984 will become a fact]” (Telegraaf, 2018a, March 21: 11). Proponents are using some articles to debunk such arguments. The employee of the AIVD mentions that the image of critical investigation of “elke nietsvermoedende burger [every unsuspecting civilian]” is wrong (Telegraaf, 2018, March 10: 26) and Rob Bertholee expresses that he cannot imagine a situation in which “een hele wijk wordt afgetapt [a whole neighbourhood will be tapped]” (Telegraaf, 2018b, March 17). Altogether, different moral understandings of the act are described in Telegraaf articles.

Proposed solution(s) Similar to the moral understanding of the situation, the articles of Telegraaf propose different solutions for the situation. In one of the articles, the solution of Kathalijne Buitenweg (‘reparatiewet [repair act]’) is mentioned. In this ‘solution’, the House of Representatives member made three adjustments in the Wiv: restriction of unspecific tapping of communication, restriction of sharing unevaluated data with foreign services and guarantees for journalistic source protection and the medical professional confidentiality (Telegraaf, 2018, March 3). Another article also emphasizes an improved act with “voldoende waarborgen tegen

34 misbruik [sufficient guaranties against misuse]” (Telegraaf, 2018a, March 21: 11). However, proponents of the act stress that the new Wiv is adequate. The CTIVD explains that the act is not perfect, however the act offers guarantees for civilians and is balanced (Telegraaf, 2018, February 27). The committee believes this law facilitates the execution of “voortvarend en intensief toezicht [expeditious and intensive supervision]” (Telegraaf, 2018, February 27). Furthermore, Rob Bertholee emphasizes that the services are “strikt [strictly]” bounded to rules (Telegraaf, 2018b, March 17). All articles considered, there is a division between the opponents whom believe a ‘fixed’ act is a solution and the proponents whom believe the considered new act is the solution.

6.1.2.2 Frames The analysed sixteen article from Telegraaf reflect multiple pre-existing frames and five newly identified frames.

Conflict The conflict frame is a recurrent frame in the newspaper. Most articles reflect this frame by speaking of the opponents and proponents of the new act. More specifically, one article connected the two parties to political proponents and opponents of the act: Mark Rutte and Sybrand Buma as proponents and Jesse Klaver and Lilian Marijnissen as opponents (Telegraaf, 2018b, March 21). Another article makes the distinction between the two ministers (the minister of Defence and the minister of the Interior) and “privacyorganisatie [privacy organization]” Bits of Freedom (Telegraaf, 2018, January 31: 2). This distinction is also reflected by the choice of “veiligheid versus privacy [security versus privacy]” (Schuckink Kool, 2018, March 13). Hoogland (2018, March 20) also mentions the minister of the Interior when he speaks of the conflict frame. According to Hoogland, “wij [we]” (by which he refers to civilians) are not able to effectively participate in the referendum, because “koningin Kajsa [queen Kajsa]” will not accept a negative outcome (p. 5).

Human interest The analysed articles gave several explanations for the human impact of the act. First of all, the most common aspect was privacy. The opponents fear for the degradation of citizens’ privacy (Telegraaf, 2018, February 27). A recurrent term for citizens is “onschuldige burgers [innocent citizens]” (Telegraaf, 2018, March 19: 8). The fear is also expressed by the reference to “Big Brother” which implies that the government is able to monitor the daily life of citizens

(Hoogland, 2018, March 20: 5). Another article reports that political proponents of the act (Mark Rutte and Sybrand Buma) accuse the leaders of Groenlinks and SP of spreading “angst [fear]” by using the perspective that the services are able to “zomaar [just]” share data with other foreign services (Telegraaf, 2018b, March 21). Finally, researchers, scientists and experts point out the increased ‘hack-risk’ of the new act, which will cause a situation in which “gevoelige gegevens op straat kunnen komen te liggen [sensitive data will be out in the open]” (Telegraaf, 2018c, March 17).

Responsibility The responsibility frame occurred rarely in the articles. Only one article referred to the responsibility of the CTIVD. The committee promises “voortvarend en intensief toezicht [expeditious and intensive supervision]” from the moment the new act will enter into force (Telegraaf, 2018, February 27). These words indicate the responsibility of the committee to supervise the services.

Morality Another frame which occurred less frequently in Telegraaf is the morality frame. Some articles mentioned the frame by referring to the services. According to an employee of the AIVD, a civil servant of the AIVD is bounded by rules: “Een ambtenaar mag alleen iets als in de wet staat dat het mag [A civil servant is only allowed to do something when the act allows it]” (Telegraaf, 2018, March 10: 26). Rob Bertholee emphasizes that people blindly trust commercial companies as Google and Facebook, while these companies are “erger [worse]” than the services which are “democratisch gecontroleerde geheime diensten [democratically checked secret services]” (Telegraaf, 2018b, March 17). This frame reflects a double moral standard. On the other hand, the newspaper also includes a negative morality frame concerning the services. An article labels the behaviour of the ministers of Defence and the Interior as “licht hypocriet [slightly hypocritical]” (Telegraaf, 2018, January 31: 2). When the ministers decided to publish the tap statistics after previously withholding this information, the Telegraaf labelled this action as an effort to improve the image of the services for the upcoming referendum. According to the newspaper, the government also neglected “scherpe kritiek van adviesorganen [strong criticism of advisory bodies]” (Telegraaf, 2017a, October 10: 2).

Other frames Insufficiency The insufficiency frame was identified in several articles. This frame mirrors the opinions which label the act as inadequate. Opponents of the act think the new act causes a “groot privacyprobleem [big privacy problem]” (Telegraaf, 2018, March 19: 8). Another article mentions that multiple organizations (for instance Amnesty International and Bits of Freedom) notice that the act contains “haken en ogen [catches]” concerning privacy (Telegraaf, 2018a, March 17). The CTIVD presents this frame more moderately by saying that the act is not perfect: “niet volmaakt [not perfect]” (Telegraaf, 2018, February 27). On the other hand, one article speaks of the insufficiency of the current act from 2002. The employee of the AIVD describes a case in which the old act is not sufficient to detect a potential threat, while the new act is indeed sufficient to do so (Telegraaf, 2018, March 10: 26).

Necessity The necessity frame is an ascendant frame in Telegraaf articles. This frame is closely connected to the appeal to security. The articles mention the “nationale veiligheid [national security]” (Telegraaf, 2018, February 27), “staatsveiligheid [State security]” (Telegraaf, 2018a, March 21: 11) and “veiligheid in Nederland en voor Nederlandse militairen in het buitenland [safety in the Netherlands and for the Dutch military in foreign countries]” (Telegraaf, 2018b, March 21). According to the proponents, the act is necessary for the protection of the Netherlands (Telegraaf, 2018a, March 17). The proponents present this necessity of the new act in Telegraaf as a result of technological changes (Telegraaf, 2018, March 19: 8) which causes the current act to be “hopeloos [hopelessly]” obsolete (Telegraaf, 2018b, March 17).

Exaggeration “Bangmakerij [scaremongering]” is a keyword which is used by both the proponents and the opponents to describe the arguments of the opposition (Telegraaf, 2018b, March 21). The exaggeration frame is presented in a few articles of Telegraaf. Proponents of the act state that the opponents impose a wrong representation of the act: the image of a service which “elke nietsvermoedende burger mag doorlichten [is allowed to screen every unsuspected citizen]” is incorrect and “slaat (…) de plank volledig mis [misses the mark]” (Telegraaf, 2018, March 10: 26). Furthermore, Rob Bertholee imposes the same frame when he explains that he cannot imagine circumstances in which a whole neighbourhood will be “afgetapt [tapped]” and he calls this technique “omslachtig [devious]” (Telegraaf, 2018b, March 17). On the contrary,

37 opponents of the act state that the proponents pretend that national security is at stake (Telegraaf, 2018b, March 21).

Ignorance The ignorance frame is reflected by two articles. In the first article, the Director General of the AIVD explains that the public holds on to a wrong representation of the data collection: “een verkeerd beeld bij het publiek [misrepresented to the public]” (Telegraaf, 2018b, March 17). The second article presents that even experts admit that the new act is complicated: “ingewikkeld [complicated]” (Telegraaf, 2018, March 19: 8). This frame communicates that the new law is difficult to comprehend and this aspect causes ignorance.

Almighty government The frame of an almighty government is reflected by the opponents of the act in a few articles. This frame labels the Dutch government as a powerful authority which is able to misuse its powers. As mentioned before, Rob Hoogland indicates that the participation of the citizens in the referendum is pretended (“net alsof”) and their voices will be neglected by “koningin Kajsa [queen Kajsa]” (Hoogland, 2018, March 20: 5). Additionally, Lilian Marijnissen states that a negative outcome of the referendum will be neglected by Mark Rutte and Sybrand Buma. She labels this behaviour as “de arrogantie van de macht [the arrogance of power]” (Telegraaf, 2018b, March 21). Another article warns that the government is dangerous because of its power: “het is de machtigste, en dus soms gevaarlijkste, partij die de samenleving kent [It is the most powerful, and thus sometimes most dangerous, party known by society]” (Telegraaf, 2018a, March 21: 11). The article mentions that Orwells 1984 might become a fact.

6.1.2.3 Conclusion The analysed articles of Telegraaf show that this newspaper also reflected the term ‘sleepwet [drag act]’ or an equivalent. The causes mirrored the same reason – the outdated act of 2002 - however different words were used. Furthermore, two moral consequences were reflected in the articles: consequences of the act according to the proponents and the consequences of the act according to the opponents. The opponents feared for hacks, the degradation of privacy and a ‘Big Brother’ society, while the proponents debunk these arguments. The proposed solutions also reflected the opinions of the two parties: the proposed act or an improved new act. Telegraaf articles presented four dominant frames: conflict, human interest, necessity and insufficiency. The minor frames consisted of the responsibility frame, morality frame,

38 exaggeration frame, ignorance frame and almighty government frame. Similar to Algemeen Dagblad, the economic consequences frame was not mentioned in any of the articles.

6.1.3 NRC Handelsblad This research analysed 22 articles from the newspaper NRC Handelsblad. The following indicators and frames were reflected and identified in the articles.

6.1.3.1 Indicators Description of the situation A majority of the analysed articles used the term ‘sleep(net)wet [drag(net) act]’ as a synonym for the new Wiv or “sleepnetbevoegdheid [dragnet capaticity]” for a specific article in the act (Februari, 2018, March 19). However, in contrary to Algemeen Dagblad and Telegraaf, there were several articles in NRC Handelsblad which did not refer to this word. Similar to the Telegraaf, one article mentions the keyword “spionagewet [espionage act]” when referring to the new act (Olsthoorn, 2017, October 2: 18). Another article used the following synonym for the act: “intelwet [intel act]” (Van den Dool & Niemantsverdriet, 2018, February 13: 8). Constant Hijzen indicates that the term ‘sleepnet [dragnet]’ is used for imagery by mentioning “sleepnetmetafoor [dragnet metaphor]” (Steketee, 2018, March 17: 1). According to Hijzen, this dominant image restricts and “vernauwt [narrows]” the discussion about the new act (Van Lonkhuyzen, 2018, March 12). One article of NRC Handelsblad begins with the description of the situation by explaining the existence of the services. According to the writers, the services protect “de democratie en de vrije burger [the democracy and the free citizen]” (Versteegh, Van Lonkhuyzen, Van den Dool & Van Wieren, 2018, March 20: 12). While most articles thus focus on the power to intercept telecommunication, one article is dedicated to the introduction of a DNA-database and the effects of this database (M’charek & De Knijff, 2018, March 20).

Description of causes The multiple articles in NRC Handelsblad describe that the new act focuses on “modernisering [modernization]” (Versteegh & Van Lonkhuyzen, 2017, November 1: 10) and an “update” of the old act (Van Lonkhuyzen, 2017, October 10: 6). The Wiv 2002 is described as “verouderd [outdated]” (Van den Dool & Niemantsverdriet, 2018, March 17: 8) because of the developments in technology (NRC Handelsblad, 2018, February 3: 14; NRC Handelsblad, 2018, March 17: 10). Overall, the causes of the situation are described in NRC Handelsblad as the adjustment of an outdated act.

Moral understanding The articles in NRC Handelsblad reflect both the effects and impact of the act according to the opponents and the proponents. The opponents speak of “schending van de privacy [infringement of privacy]” (Versteegh & Van Lonkhuyzen, 2017, November 1: 10) and “binnen (…) dringen in het privédomein van de burger [invasion of the private domain of the citizen]” (NRC Handelsblad, 2018, March 17: 10). NRC Handelsblad mentions that the new act results in clear sailing for the services: “met de nieuwe wet is de deur van het slot [the new act opens the door]” (NRC Handelsblad, 2018, March 17: 10). Februari (2018, March 19) states that the act has a profound impact: “Heel Nederland mag in één klap worden bespioneerd [in one fell swoop, the whole country may be subjected to espionage]”. Moreover, opponents fear that the act allows massive interception of data (Van den Dool & Van Lonkhuyzen, 2017, November 1: 2) while using the keywords “onschuldige burgers [innocent civilians]” (Van Lonkhuyzen, 2018, March 12; Steketee, 2018, March 17: 1). Bart Nijman imposes a more extreme image of the act: “totale DDR-stijl privacysloop door een stasi-overheid uit 1984 [total DDR-style privacy-demolition by a stasi-government from 1984]” (Van den Dool & Niemantsverdriet, 2018, February 13: 8). Additionally, this last description is interchangeable with the ideas of some opponents about the future consequences of the act. Kees van der Pijl views the act as “opstap naar een postmoderne politiestaat [stepping stone to a postmodern police state]” and the opportunity to establish a “,,surveillancestaat" (…) in de geest van George Orwell's 1984 [surveillance state in the spirit of George Orwell’s 1984]” (Van den Dool & Niemantsverdriet, 2018, February 13: 8). Hijink (2018, March 20) fears the future use of the act: a potential “function creep” which results in a government which controls its citizens (p. 4). The editor describes the following image as a possible result of the new act: “in 2034 opgescheept met een regering die haar burgers controleert - bijvoorbeeld op religie of achtergrond [being saddled with a government in 2034 which checks its citizens on - for example religion or background]” (Hijink, 2018, March 20: 4). Another opponent doubts whether the government will be trustworthy in the future (Weeda, 2018, March 21: 6). Koning (2018, March 19) states that the new act results in safety risks, among other risks: “kwetsbaarheden [vulnerabilities]”, “datalekken [data leaks]” and “verlies van controle en onvoldoende toezicht op het gebruik van de gedeelde informatie door buitenlandse diensten [loss of control and insufficient supervision on the use of shared information by foreign services]” (p. 18). A new impact of the act is described by Amade M’charek and Peter de Knijff. These professors fear for “een oncontroleerbare uitholling van het forensisch DNA-bewijs [an uncontrollable cavity of

40 forensic DNA-evidence]” because of the introduction of the DNA-database (M’charek & De Knijff, 2018, March 20). On the other hand, multiple articles represent effects which favour the new act. One article mentions that the acceptance of the act by the parliament does not result in an infringement of human rights (Olsthoorn, 2017, October 2: 18). Kajsa Ollongren is one of the proponents in the articles whom counters the term ‘sleepnet [dragnet]’ by referring to the guarantees in the act (NRC Handelsblad, 2018, February 3: 14). Also the CTIVD supports this argument concerning guarantees (Versteegh, Van Lonkhuyzen, Van den Dool & Van Wieren, 2018, March 20: 12) and another article mentions that the guarantees impose restrictions: “De knijper gaat niet zomaar op de kabel [the clip will not just be put on the cable]” (Van Lonkhuyzen, 2017, October 5: 1).

Proposed solution(s) Besides multiple moral understandings of the situation, the articles of NRC Handelsblad also propose several solutions for the situation. According to Thierry Baudet, ‘we’ need to stand up for ‘our’ privacy, in order not to lose it (Meeus, 2018, January 25: 2). A referendum is suggested as a solution. Opponents regard the referendum as “noodrem [emergency brake]” or “afgeven van een noodsignaal [send off an emergency signal]” (NRC Handelsblad, 2018, March 17: 10) and the opportunity for “een meer genuanceerde discussie [a more nuanced discussion]” (Van Lonkhuyzen, 2017, October 10: 6). Maxim Februari (2018, March 19) notices the referendum as a way to enforce a renewed act. While these articles offer the referendum as a solution, other articles mention that a referendum is not a solution for the situation (NRC Handelsblad, 2018, February 10: 12). Olsthoorn (2017, October 2) describes the referendum as “onjuist middel [incorrect means]” and views the referendum as the cause of “simplificatie van argumenten [simplification of arguments]” (p. 18). Constant Hijzen concludes that the discussion needed “een soort feitelijke injectie (…) meer argumenten van voorstanders [sort of factual injection of more arguments of proponents]” (Van Lonkhuyzen, 2018, March 1).

6.1.3.2 Frames The following frames were represented in the articles of NRC Handelsblad.

Conflict All articles mentioned the conflict frame in some way. The majority of the articles spoke of the opponents and proponents of the new act. Versteegh and Van Lonkhuyzen (2017, November 1) made a reference to the “tegenkamp [camp of opponents]” and “voorkamp [camp of

41 proponents]” (p. 10), while Van den Dool and Niemantsverdriet (2018, March 17) mentioned “een kloof tussen jong en oud [a gap between young and old]” (p. 8). Meeus (2018, January 25) mentions the conflict frame through a reference to politics: “botsende partijleiders [clashing leaders of political parties]” (p. 2).

Human interest The human interest frame is presented in several articles in the newspaper, mainly by addressing the impact on privacy. Two articles mention the emotion “angst [fear]” or “bang [anxious]” while explaining the arguments of the opponents of the act (Olsthoorn, 2017, October 2: 18; Versteegh, Van Lonkhuyzen, Van den Dool & Van Wieren, 2018, March 20: 12; Van den Dool & Van Lonkhuyzen, 2017, November 1: 2). Similar to the previous analysed newspapers, several articles mention ‘onschuldige burgers [innocent civilians]’ while reflecting the arguments of both opponents and proponents of the act. Ton van Beers mentions that the data of civilians “op straat komen te liggen [will be out in the open]” (Van den Dool & Niemantsverdriet, 2018, March 17: 8). Furthermore, an article specifically focuses on the hack- methods of the AIVD and describes these method as “een bedreiging voor iedereen [a threat to everyone]” (NRC Handelsblad, 2018, March 20: 4). Maxim Februari (2018, March 19) describes a more explicit ‘scenario’ by writing: “Straks (…) gaat al ons telefoonverkeer via de werkkamers van Poetin, Trump en Erdogan [Soon all our telephone communication will go through the offices of Putin, Trump and Erdogan]”. A proponent, Jaro Gevers, labels the arguments of the opponents as “ongegronde angsten [unfounded fears]” (Van den Dool & Niemantsverdriet, 2018, February 13: 8). Another proponent of the act describes a profound consequence of the situation without the new act. According to Docters van Leeuwen, without the new act “„kunnen we geen begin van een garantie meer geven dat we tijdig aanslagen" zullen zien aankomen [we cannot offer guarantees that we will timely notice attacks]” and “is (…) moeilijk te voorkomen dat Nederlandse militairen op missie in het buitenland „overhoop geschoten worden” [it is hard to prevent that Dutch dispatched military personnel in foreign countries will be shot]” (Versteegh & Van Lonkhuyzen, 2017, November 1: 10).

Morality The morality frame is less represented in NRC Handelsblad, however some articles contain this frame. Two articles mention the democratic development of the act and democratic supervision: “In democratische zin is er niet vals gespeeld [In the democratic sense, no one cheated]” (Olsthoorn, 2017, October 2: 18) and “effectieve democratische controle op de diensten

[effective democratic control of the services]” (Versteegh, Van Lonkhuyzen, Van den Dool & Van Wieren, 2018, March 20: 12). However, the organizations Bits for Freedom and Nederlandse Vereniging van Journalisten state that the government “niet tegemoet gekomen [is] aan een reeks legitieme bezwaren [did not meet a series of legitimate objections]” (NRC Handelsblad, 2018, February 10: 12). Maxim Februari demands honesty from the governing parties (Februari, 2018, March 19). Bits for Freedom director Hans de Zwart also mentions a moral prescription: “Burgers die niets te verbergen hebben horen niet in het vizier van de diensten [Civilians whom have nothing to hide should not be in the crosshairs of the services]” (Steketee, 2018, March 17: 1). Moreover, some articles referred to organizations as ‘Raad van State [Council of State]’ which criticized the new act.

Economic consequences In contrary to Algemeen Dagblad and Telegraaf, NRC Handelsblad reflects the economic consequences frame in one article. According to Koning (2018, March 19), the services have an incentive to keep the vulnerabilities in the networks or equipment quiet and this will result in “ernstige economische schade [serious economic damage]” (p. 18). Moreover, the article makes a referral to an example in Germany where databases were used for espionage and weakened the German economy (Koning, 2018, March 19: 18).

Responsibility The responsibility frame is a minority frame in NRC Handelsblad, although some articles assigned responsibility to the government. Firstly, Peter Olsthoorn mentions that the government is (partly) guilty (“medeschuldig”) of the lack of public knowledge about the work of the services (Olsthoorn, 2017, October 2: 18). A second article mentions that intelligence- experts accuse politicians of “een passieve houding [a passive attitude]” towards the referendum (Van Lonkhuyzen, 2018, March 1). Finally, Hans de Zwart states that services have the responsibility to explain clearly why certain powers are present in the act (Steketee, 2018, March 17: 1).

Other frames Insufficiency The insufficiency frame occurred less frequently in NRC Handelsblad than in the previous two newspapers. This frame points out the insufficiency of the new act. An example of this frame is the description of Van Lonkhuyzen (2017, October 5) whom describes the act as “vaag

43 geformuleerd [vaguely formulated]” because of technological developments (p. 1). A columnist of the newspaper writes that the act itself imposes “veiligheidsrisico’s [security risks]” (Koning, 2018, March 19: 18). Moreover, Bart Jacobs indicates that the new act does not offer statutory restrictions which will help the AIVD to resist “druk [pressure]” from foreign services (Versteegh, Van Lonkhuyzen, Van den Dool & Van Wieren, 2018, March 20: 12). Some other articles mention their opinion about the lack of guarantees in the act. Ronald Prins indicates that “waarborgen moeten in de wet zélf [guarantees should be represented in the act itself]” (NRC Handelsblad, 2018, February 10: 12) and professors state that the act “ondergraaft de waarborgen voor de DNA-databank [undermines the guarantees of the DNA-database]” (M’charek & De Knijff, 2018, March 20). Finally, an article mentions that opponents fear that the supervisors of TIB do not have enough “armslag [elbow room]” (Versteegh & Van Lonkhuyzen, 2017, November 1: 10).

Necessity The necessity frame is frequently used to express the necessity of the new act. In NRC Handelsblad, the articles reflected the keywords “nodig [necessary]” (NRC Handelsblad, 2018, February 3: 14; Februari, 2018, March 19), “niet kunnen wachten [cannot wait]” (Van den Dool & Van Lonkhuyzen, 2017, November 1: 2), “pure noodzaak [pure necessity]” (Van de Wiel, 2017, October 30: 8) or as the opponents of the act phrase: “noodzakelijk kwaad [necessary evil]” (Niemantsverdriet & Van den Dool, 2018, March 1; Steketee, 2018, March 17: 1). Two articles specifically referred to a failed attack at the Thalys-train in August 2015, in order to explain the necessity of a longer retainment period of data (Versteegh & Van Lonkhuyzen, 2017, November 1: 10; Versteegh, Van Lonkhuyzen, Van den Dool & Van Wieren, 2018, March 20: 12).

Ignorance The ignorance frame in NRC Handelsblad includes more than the simple ignorance of the content of the act. Nevertheless, ignorance is connected to “onwetendheid [ignorance]” in the discussion and debates about the act (Van Lonkhuyzen, 2018, March 1). Furthermore, the frame also reflects the mystery (“geheimzinnigheid”) concerning the work of the services (Van Lonkhuyzen, 2018, March 12). Their job is thus labelled by an opponent of the act as “schimmig werk [enigmatic work]” and “schimmig bestaan [enigmatic existence]” (Februari, 2018, March 19). Finally, the frame contains simplification of the discussion about the act (Olsthoorn, 2017, October 2: 18; Versteegh & Van Lonkhuyzen, 2017, November 1: 10). This simplification is

44 substantiated in another article which labels the act as “ingewikkeld stuk [complicated piece]” (NRC Handelsblad, 2018, March 17: 10). Despite the different forms of this frame, the frame is a minority frame in NRC Handelsblad.

Exaggeration In the analysed NRC Handelsblad articles, the exaggeration frame appeared in some of these articles. Van Lonkhuyzen (2017, October 10) used a message from Piratenpartij as example of the exaggeration concerning the new act (p. 6). According to some articles and proponents, another exaggeration is a massive and random collection of data of “onschuldige burgers [innocent civilians]” (Versteegh & Van Lonkhuyzen, 2017, November 1: 10; Versteegh, Van Lonkhuyzen, Van den Dool & Van Wieren, 2018, March 20: 12). Tapping of a whole neighbourhood is labelled by Rob Bertholee as “spookbeeld [phantom]” (Van den Dool & Niemantsverdriet, 2018, March 17: 8). Another example of the exaggeration frame is the use of demagogy. This concept is not exactly the same as exaggeration, however demagogy is related to exaggeration and falls within the same category because both explain the ‘wrong’ use of words. Constant Hijzen fears that “demagogie [demagogy]” is used by the opponents, while Hans de Zwart accuses the government of this phenomenon (Steketee, 2018, March 17: 1).

Almighty government The almighty government frame reoccurred in NRC Handelsblad. A few articles described the opinions of several opponents of the act whom feared a powerful government in the future. One article mentioned that the new act creates more democratic control which causes the risk of “te veel politieke bemoeienis [too much political meddling]” (Versteegh, Van Lonkhuyzen, Van den Dool & Van Wieren, 2018, March 20: 12). Words as “DDR-stijl [DDR-style]”, “stasi- overheid [stasi-government]”, “surveillancestaat [surveillance state]”, “George Orwell’s 1984” and “postmoderne politiestaat [postmodern police state]” were also used to create this frame (Van den Dool & Niemantsverdriet, 2018, February 13: 8). Another opponent insinuated that the Netherlands is “nog geen dictatuur [not yet a dictatorship]” (Weeda, 2018, March 21: 6) and editor Marc Hijink wrote about a potential “function creep” (Hijink, 2018, March 20: 4).

Destructive NRC Handelsblad reflected a new frame in one article. The destructive frame indicates that the new act will have damaging consequences. This frame appeared once in an article which discussed the new DNA database. According to the writers of the article, the new database

45 would have devastating consequences for the Dutch criminal legislation. Amade M’charek and Peter de Knijff explain that criminal legislation concerning DNA is labelled as controversial in other countries and that the new act will undermine the guarantees in the criminal legislation (M’charek & De Knijff, 2018, March 20).

Importance This frame is mentioned by both opponents and proponents of the act. According to some voters in Weesp, the referendum could be explained as a choice between counter-terrorism and privacy: persons whom voted in favour of the act cared more about the former, while opponents cared more about the latter. The respondents framed the act as a question about importance (Weeda, 2018, March 21: 6).

“Stowaway of the democracy” (Hijzen, 2018: 19). The previous defined metaphor of Hijzen is represented in one article. The article describes the services as “fremdkörper [foreign body]” within the democracy (Versteegh, Van Lonkhuyzen, Van den Dool & Van Wieren, 2018, March 20: 12). This keyword explains that the services are an alien concept within a democratic state.

6.1.3.3 Conclusion NRC Handelsblad mirrored a variety of situation descriptions, moral understandings and proposed solutions. The description of the causes explained the modernization and adjustment of the old act. Dominant frames in NRC Handelsblad are the conflict frame, human interest frame and necessity frame. Minor frames are morality, responsibility, economic consequence, insufficiency, ignorance, exaggeration and almighty government. Three new (minor) frames were identified: the destructive frame, importance frame and Hijzen’s metaphor (2018) “stowaway of the democracy” (p. 19).

6.1.4 Trouw This research analysed nineteen articles from the newspaper Trouw. The following indicators and frames were reflected and identified.

6.1.4.1 Indicators Description of the situation Most articles describe the situation by referring to “sleepwet [drag act]” (Van Teeffelen, 2017, October 3) or another equivalent of this metaphor, for instance “tapwet [tap act]” (Trouw, 2017, October 7: 10) or “aftapwet [drain act]” (Abels, 2018, February 22: 1). One article mentions that the ministry of the Interior tries to avoid the use of these terms by the municipalities. However, the article shows that many municipalities rather use these keywords to describe the act instead of the original name of the act (Abels, 2018, February 22: 1). In this way, the ministry tries to inform the civilians about the upcoming referendum. Other articles reflect the unawareness of the topic of this voting in society. The matter is “ondoorzichtig [opaque]” according to Maaike Bos (2018, March 21: 16), Van Teeffelen (2018, March 21) accuses the opponents and proponents of “gebruik van drogredenen [use of fallacies]” (p. 6) and another article reflects that a student of the University of Amsterdam “is ‘niet zo bezig geweest’ met het referendum [is not concerned with the referendum]” (Wijn, 2018, March 20: 5). Rob de Wijk (2017, November 3) writes off the referendum by calling it “mosterd na de maaltijd [too little too late]” (p. 25). The columnist mentions that the guarantee against random and massive interception of data is included in the new act. Yet, another article labels this guarantee as “schijnoplossing [fallacious solution]” and “geslepen zinnetje [cunning sentence]” (De Vries, 2018, February 21: 21). Finally, some articles mention the introduction of the new act by describing “soepele invoering [smooth introduction]” (Zuidervaart, 2018, March 9: 4) and “geruisloos aangenomen [silently adopted]” (Klein Jan, 2018, January 8: 2).

Description of causes The causes of the situation are largely described in the articles of Trouw as necessary. The newspaper attributes the word “broodnodig [much needed]” to the extension of the services’ powers (Van Teeffelen, 2017, October 10: 3). Furthermore, Ockje Tellegen (member of House of Representatives for VVD) states that the new act “hard nodig is om ons land veilig te houden [is desperately needed in order to keep our country save]” (Trouw, 2017, October 30: 7). This goal is described in another article as “Nederland beter wapenen tegen moderne criminaliteit [to arm the Netherlands better against modern criminality]” (Zuidervaart, 2018, March 9: 4) and the old act is labelled as “verouderd [outdated]” (Van Teeffelen, 2018, March 9: 4).

Moral understanding Similar to the previous newspapers, Trouw also refers to consequences for a specific group of people. Multiple articles mention the keywords ‘onschuldige burgers [innocent citizens]’ to indicate this group, while other articles use the words “niet verdachte burgers [citizens whom are not suspected]” (Trouw, 2017, October 30: 7) for the same group. According to Trouw, the new act imposes further restrictions for privacy (Van Teeffelen, 2017, October 10: 3). While some articles reflect arguments which debunk that the services will massively collect data of every random person (Abels, 2018, February 22: 1; Van Teeffelen, 2018, March 21: 6; Zuidervaart, 2018, March 9: 5), Trouw also reflects the arguments of opponents that this guarantee is meaningless (De Vries, 2018, February 21: 21) and the algorithms used by the services will lead to discrimination (Naafs & Van Teeffelen, 2018, March 14: 4). Moreover, one article refers to the argument of National Association of General Practitioners (Landelijke Huisartsenvereniging) which states that the new act “bewust [willingly]” infringes the professional confidentiality (Trouw, 2017, October 7: 10).

Proposed solution(s) Not all articles of Trouw offer a solution for the situation, however multiple articles reflect the referendum as a solution (Trouw, 2017, October 7: 10; Van Teeffelen, 2017, October 10: 3). These articles explain that a vote against the act is an opportunity “om verbeteringen aan te brengen in de wet [to place improvements in the act]” (De Vries, 2018, February 21: 21), or in other words “een paar aanpassingen [ a few adjustments]” (Bos, 2018, March 21: 16). Similar to Telegraaf, an article in Trouw mentions the comments of CTIVD on the act. The CTIVD labels the law as balanced and comments that the act creates effective supervision (Trouw, 2018, February 28: 8). However, Marc Schuilenburg does not regards this supervision as sufficient and recommends “doelmatigheidscontrole [performance audit]” (Naafs & Van Teeffelen, 2018, March 14: 5).

6.1.4.2 Frames Conflict Trouw reflects the conflict frame in every analysed article. A majority of the articles refers directly to the proponents and the opponents of the act. Other articles mention the conflict between privacy and security (Van Teeffelen, 2018, March 21: 6). Finally, some articles describe the conflict between younger people and older people concerning the act (Van Teeffelen, 2018, March 20: 5).

Human interest The human interest frame is a dominant frame. In Trouw articles, this frame is mainly used in relation to privacy. According to the initiators of the referendum, the act causes that “privacy wordt afgenomen [privacy is taken away]” (Klein Jan, 2018, January 8: 2). Opponents fear for the infringement of privacy of “onschuldige burgers [innocent civilians]” (Zuidervaart, 2018, March 9: 4) and Nine de Vries of Amnesty International mentions that “veiligheid van individuen [security of individuals]” is under pressure (De Vries, 2018, February 21: 21). Furthermore, a few articles state that the act has impact on the confidentiality of doctors and journalists (Trouw, 2017, October 7: 10; Bos, 2018, March 21: 16).

Morality The morality frame appeared less often in Trouw. One article reflects the moral prescription according to the initiators of the referendum: “Internet, zeggen ze, behoort tot hun privésfeer [Internet, they say, belongs to their private sphere]” (Klein Jan, 2018, January 8: 2). In another article, the referendum is labelled as a question whether the new act “deugt of niet [is suitable or not]” (Van Teeffelen, 2018, March 21: 6). Finally, two articles mention the ‘privacy paradox’. This paradox describes that civilians willingly put their private life online on social media, while these persons are against the new act because of the infringement of privacy (Wijn, 2018, March 20: 5). Rob de Wijk ascribes “naïviteit [naivety]” to these persons (De Wijk, 2018, March 16).

Responsibility The responsibility frame appoints responsibility to authorities. In Trouw, this frame was used for the government and the CTIVD. According to these articles, the government needs to approve the act (De Vries, 2018, February 21: 21) and the CTIVD ensures “voortvarend en intensief toezicht [expeditious and intensive supervision]” (Trouw, 2018, February 28: 8). Lastly, another article explains the “zorgplicht [duty of care]” of the services to guarantee quality and reliability of their “gegevensanalyse [data analysis]” (Naafs &Van Teeffelen, 2018, March 14: 5).

Other frames Insufficiency Risks of the act are used in the articles for the insufficiency frame. This frame appeared in the several analysed articles. The confidentiality between patients and doctors and between journalists and their sources is named as one of the risks (Trouw, 2017, October 7: 10; Bos, 2018, March 21: 16). Moreover, the content of the act is labelled as another risk. Trouw reflects that the sentence “Van het willekeurig en massaal verzamelen van gegevens van burgers in Nederland of het buitenland (‘sleepnet’) kan, mag en zal geen sprake zijn [There can, may and will not be random and massive collection of Dutch citizens’ data in the Netherlands or a foreign country (‘dragnet’)]” is not included in the act and one article indicates that “toezeggingen [commitments]” do not offer protection (De Vries, 2018, February 21: 21). Words as “ineffectief [ineffective]” (Naafs &Van Teeffelen, 2018, March 14: 5) and “vaag [vague]” (Van Teeffelen, 2018, March 9: 4) are mentioned in the articles in order to describe certain aspects of the act. Lastly, the CTIVD labels the act as “niet volmaakt [not perfect]” (Trouw, 2018, February 28: 8) and Rob de Wijk describes it as “onvolkomen [imperfect]” (De Wijk, 2018, March 16).

Necessity The moral understanding of the analysed articles already shows that the necessity frame made an appearance in multiple Trouw articles. The articles utilized the words “broodnodig [much needed]” (Van Teeffelen, 2017, October 10: 3) “noodzaak [necessity]” (De Wijk, 2018, March 2: 23), “essentieel [essential]” (Naafs &Van Teeffelen, 2018, March 14: 5) and “cruciaal [crucial]” (Van Teeffelen, 2018, March 9: 5) for (certain aspects of) the act. The newspaper states that proponents of the act describe the necessity by imposing arguments of the consequences of the absence of the new Wiv: “Nederland zou een totaal onveilig land worden, een paradijs voor kwaadwillenden, en het internationaal terrorisme zou een kans voor open doel krijgen. [The Netherlands would be a total insecure country, a paradise for malicious people and international terrorism would be given free rein]” (Trouw, 2018, March 21: 21).

Exaggeration A minority frame in Trouw is the exaggeration frame. Only a few articles represent words which could be identified as this frame. One of those articles stated that different “drogredenen [fallacies]” are used by both the proponents and opponents (Van Teeffelen, 2018, March 21: 6). The article labels two arguments specifically as exaggerations: the argument of proponents

50 about the urgency of the act and the argument of opponents about the services which will always eavesdrop random citizens. Another article supported this frame as well by indicating that both parties gave “een onverantwoorde voorstelling van zaken [an irresponsible description of the situation]” (Trouw, 2018, March 21: 21).

Ignorance Words as “black box” (Naafs & Van Teeffelen, 2018, March 14: 4), “vals dilemma [false dilemma]” (Van Teeffelen, 2018, March 21: 6) and “ondoorzichtig [opaque]” (Bos, 2018, March 21: 16) are used to indicate the ignorance about the act. The work of the services is labelled as “geheim [secretive]” (Van Teeffelen, 2018, March 9: 5) and the act as too complex for a referendum (De Wijk, 2018, March 16). Furthermore, one of the initiators of the referendum fears that citizens are ignorant about the consequences of the act for privacy (Klein Jan, 2018, January 8: 2). Overall, this frame does not occur frequently in the analysed articles.

Importance According to this frame, certain aspects prevail above other aspects. The newspaper describes that proponents consider that “belang van veiligheid [importance of security]” prevails (Van Teeffelen, 2017, October 10: 3). On the other hand, one article explains that the youth believes that privacy is a “belangrijker element [more important element]” (Van Teeffelen, 2018, March 20: 5).

Almighty government The following frame appeared once in an article of Trouw. The frame describes that the new Wiv enforces dependency on “politieke wil en professionaliteit van de diensten [political will and professionality of the services]” (De Vries, 2018, February 21: 21).

6.1.4.3 Conclusion Trouw reflected various indicators, however most of them were similar to the indicators of the previous three newspapers. An exception was the moral understanding of the professional confidentiality for doctors. The frames concerning conflict, human interest, insufficiency and necessity were present in most news articles. The minor frames in Trouw are morality, responsibility, ignorance, exaggeration, importance and almighty government. Finally, the economic consequences frame was not mentioned in Trouw.

6.1.5 Volkskrant In this research, 21 articles from the newspaper Volkskrant were analysed. The following indicators and frames were reflected and identified.

6.1.5.1 Indicators Description of the situation Similar to the previous analysed newspapers, most articles in Volkskrant named the new act‘sleepwet [drag act]’ or an equivalent: “aftapwet [drain act]” (Modderkolk, 2017, October 10: 8) and “tapwet [tap act]” (Besselink, 2017, September 8: 9). A new identified label for this act is “anti-terreurwet [anti-terror act]” (De Vries, 2018, March 5: 14). An article in the newspaper describes that the act is “stilletjes [quietly]” accepted by parliament (Kraak, 2017, October 14: 18). Furthermore, most articles mention the content of the act by referring to “digitaal sleepnet [digital dragnet]” (Besselink, 2017, September 8: 9). One of the articles specifically focuses on another aspect of the act. According to this article, the power of the services which offers the possibility of “hacken” is just as “ingrijpend voor burgers [far- reaching for civilians]” as the power to tap telecommunication (Modderkolk, 2017, February 2: 9). On the contrary, another article emphasizes that the new act offers poor protection for journalists (Trapman, 2018, February 22: 22).

Description of causes Not every analysed article names the causes of the new act. Some articles mention the “modernisering [modernization]” of the old act (Modderkolk, 2017, September 22: 12) and the necessity of the new act or in other words: “cruciaal [crucial]” (De Vries, 2018, January 27: 5). The old act is described as outdated (Von Piekartz, 2018, March 16: 14). Proponents of the act emphasize that the new act will prevent terrorism and detect Russian hackers (Wagendorp, 2017, November 2: 2).

Moral understanding The infringement of privacy is frequently mentioned as an effect of the new act. One article emphasizes that the expansion of the power to hack results in a profound “extra privacyschending [extra infringement of privacy]” (Bolwijn & Modderkolk, 2018, March 20: 7). Furthermore, the term ‘onschuldige mensen/burgers [innocent people/civilians]’ is often used. Other articles mention that the government will watch you – or in other words: “over de schouder kan meekijken [look over your shoulder]” (Trapman, 2018, February 22: 22). Some

52 articles impose a more profound impact which reflect the concerns of opponents: “online- surveillancestaat [online-surveillance state]” (Modderkolk, 2017, September 22), new powers which enable “inbreken [burgling]” (Wagendorp, 2017, November 2: 2) and “gevoelige informatie kan op straat komen te liggen [sensitive information could get out in the open]”(Volkskrant, 2018, March 19: 4; Bolwijn, 2018, March 17).

Proposed solution(s) The articles reflect a dichotomy. Half of the articles mention that the referendum is not the right means. The referendum is labelled as “symbolische exercitie [symbolic vote]” (Modderkolk, 2017, September 22: 13) and the reason is described as a lack of room “voor nuance [for nuance]” (Modderkolk, 2017, October 10: 8). On the other hand, other articles mention the emphasis expressed by opponents to vote against the new act in order to demand an improvement of the act and express “een tegensignaal [a signal against the act]” (De Vries, 2018, March 5: 14; De Vries, 2018, March 20). Moreover, some articles describe more explicit solutions for the new act: no extra powers (Van Schaik & Brongers, 2018, January 30: 22), strengthening of checks (Wagendorp, 2017, November 2: 2) and independent checks by the court (Schouten, 2018, March 21: 25).

6.1.5.2 Frames Conflict Also the articles in Volkskrant use the conflict frame frequently to describe the opponents and proponents of the act. While a few articles mention the disagreements about this act in parliament (Besselink, 2017, September 8: 9), another article underscores the “generatiekloof [generation gap]” which is reflected by this discussion (Von Piekartz, 2018, March 16: 14).

Human interest Another dominant frame in the articles of Volkskrant is the human interest frame. This frame is reflected by referring to emotions as “teleurstelling [disappointment]” about the impact of the referendum (Modderkolk, 2017, October 10: 8) and “angst [fear]” for the involvement of the authorities in private life (Schouten, 2018, March 21: 25) or “Big Brother” (Bolwijn & Modderkolk, 2018, March 20: 6). This frame is also reflected by multiple articles which use the impact on the privacy of “onschuldige [innocent]” civilians/people (Righton, 2017, October 30: 2; De Vries, 2018, March 5: 14). One article specifically describes the impact of the act for journalists as “Dubbel verlies [double loss]” (Trapman, 2018, February 22: 22).

Morality The morality frame is less frequently presented in the analysed articles. The articles describe in which way society should regard the act – one of the initiators of the referendum mentions that “heel Nederland [the whole country]” should be against the act (Righton, 2017, October 30: 2) – and the reasons for this point of view – “staat (…) op gespannen voet met de uitleg die (…) het Europees Hof voor de Rechten van de Mens geeft [is at odds with the explanation of the European Court of Human Rights]” (Trapman, 2018, February 22: 22). Bert Wagendorp emphasizes that “gezaghebbende instanties [authoritative institutions]” question the new act and he even associates the act with illegality by labelling a power in the new act as “inbreken [burgling]” (Wagendorp, 2017, November 2: 2).

Economic consequences Two articles mention the economic consequences. The first article mentions that the term ‘sleep [drag]’ is misleading, because there is no economic capacity – “veel te duur [too expensive]” (Modderkolk, 2017, September 22: 13). The second article describes that the services will hack innocent people indirectly to gather information about a target, because the direct way is too expensive – “dure grap [expensive joke]” (Modderkolk, 2018, February 2: 9).

Other frames Necessity The necessity frame is less dominant and mostly describes that the new act is “noodzakelijk [necessity]” (Besselink, 2017, September 8: 9). Other keywords which were used for the necessity are “cruciaal [crucial]” (De Vries, 2018, January 27: 5) and “sowieso moet [de wet] komen [the act is needed for sure]” (Van Schaik & Brongers, 2018, January 30: 22). Stan Dessens (2018, March 16) emphasizes the necessity by saying that negligence of providing the services with sufficient powers is similar to “het paard achter de wagen [spannen] [putting the cart before the horse]” (p. 23).

Insufficiency The insufficiency frame highlights shortcomings which the articles ascribe to the act. A few articles mention that the supervision of the act “schiet tekort [falls short]” (Schouten, 2018, March 21: 25; Kraak, 2017, October 14: 18) and opponents of the act describe this procedure as “een wassen neus [a sham]” (Modderkolk, 2017, September 22: 13). Furthermore, another

54 article describes that the act will result security issues (Van Schaik & Brongers, 2018, January 30: 22) and privacy risks (Modderkolk, 2018, February 2: 9). Leon Trapman (2018, February 22) labels the new act as “tekortkoming [shortcoming]” of the protection of journalists (p. 22).

Exaggeration The words “doembeelden [doom images]”, “karikaturen [caricatures]” and “feitelijkheid al aardig zoek [the factuality is lost]” reflect the exaggeration frame (Modderkolk, 2017, October 10: 8). These words are ascribed to arguments of both opponents and proponents. The keyword “mediahype” (Von Piekartz, 2018, March 16: 14) is used to describe the upcoming referendum.

Ignorance The ignorance frame represents ambiguity of the new act or arguments of proponents and opponents. The articles in Volkskrant represent this frame through the keywords “misleidend [misleading]” (Modderkolk, 2017, September 22: 13), “misverstand [misunderstanding]” (Bolwijn, 2018, March 17), “misvatting [misconception]” (Bolwijn & Modderkolk, 2018, March 20: 7) and “vaagtaal [vague language]” (Kraak, 2017, October 14: 18). The articles describe that ignorance is caused by an one-sided debate (Modderkolk, 2018, February 2: 9) and unawareness about the risks of the internet by older generations (Von Piekartz, 2018, March 16: 14).

Almighty government The articles in Volkskrant furthermore include references to the almighty government frame. Possible consequences of the act are mentioned and labelled as “online-surveillancestaat [online-surveillance state]” (Modderkolk, 2017, September 22: 12) and association with the “repressieve staat [repressive state]” and “Noord-Korea [North-Korea]” (Bolwijn & Modderkolk, 2018, March 20: 6) Bert Wagendorp (2017, November 2) fears that a future ruler (“idioot [idiot]”) might misuse the act (p. 2).

Importance Two articles describe the importance frame. The first article explains that the risk for society justifies and prevails the risk of infringement of privacy (Dessens, 2018, March 16: 23). The other article also mentions the dilemma between the infringement of privacy and countering terrorism (Bolwijn & Modderkolk, 2018, March 20: 7).

“State within a state” (Hijzen, 2018: 23) The last frame in Volkskrant shows similarities with the metaphor identified by Hijzen. Lawyer Michiel Pestman explains that the service checks itself instead of an independent organization and in this way ‘marks its own homework’ (Schouten, 2018, March 21: 25). This explanation is consistent with the metaphor of a state within a state, which describes an uncontrollable force.

6.1.5.3 Conclusion A new identified name for the act in the newspaper was the term ‘anti-terreurwet [anti-terror act]’. Furthermore, the indicators were mostly similar to the other newspapers. The conflict, human interest, necessity, insufficiency frames were present in the most articles. On the other hand, the morality, economic consequences, exaggeration, ignorance, almighty government, importance and ‘state within a state’ frames were only mentioned in a few articles of Volkskrant. None of the articles mentioned the responsibility frame.

6.2 Television broadcasts 6.2.1 Zondag met Lubach The first television broadcast which is analysed in this research is Zondag met Lubach. This is a satiric television programme presented by Arjen Lubach, which can be identified as semi- journalism. On 1 October 2017, the show included an item on the proposed new act which presumably had a great impact on the requests for a referendum on this act. The headlines of the broadcast were repeated by weekly programmes.

6.2.1.1 Indicators Description of the situation In his programme, Arjen Lubach firstly describes that the act contains the powers of the "geheime diensten [secret services]" (Lubach, 2017). He furthermore explains that there is something peculiar about the new act:"iets geks aan de hand [something peculiar is going on]" (Lubach, 2017). According to Lubach, the act gives the services the power to eavesdrop everybody. Moreover, the presenter mentions that the new act "klinkt super handig [sounds very handy]" by which Lubach indicates that there is a catch (Lubach, 2017).

Description of causes Similar to the newspapers, Lubach mentions that the new act is necessary. He states that the old act is "achterhaald [obsolete]" and was made in "een hele andere tijd [a different time]" (Lubach,

2017). He describes this period as an era without Facebook and Whatsapp. According to Lubach, the AIVD wants the new act in order to efficiently protect the citizens.

Moral understanding In the broadcast, the presenter states that in the past a perpetrator of an attack was often a target of security services prior to the attack. Lubach connects this statement to a cause: services already have too much data to analyse. This argument is followed by the following explanation: "meer data betekent dus niet altijd meer veiligheid [more data does not necessarily mean more security]" (Lubach, 2017). The presenter uses this explanation to provide a moral understanding for increase of data because of the new act. Moreover, Lubach uses the word "onschuldige burgers [innocent citizens]" when he states that the act provides a "sleepnet [dragnet]" for the services to gather data from a certain neighbourhood.

Proposed solutions In the programme, the referendum is mentioned as a solution for the situation. Lubach acknowledges that the referendum does not stop the act from entering into force. However, the presenter explains that the referendum sends the following signal to the members of parliament: block the act and change it.

6.2.1.2 Frames Conflict The broadcast includes the conflict frame by mentioning that not everyone is "blij [content]" about the act (Lubach, 2017). The presenter refers to the opponents by naming them "tegenstander [opponent]" (Lubach, 2017). Furthermore, Lubach suggests that none of the computer-owners supports the new act.

Human interest In the programme, the words "onschuldige burgers [innocent civilians]", "digitale sleepnetten [digital dragnets]" and "zorgen om de Wiv [worries about the Wiv]" are used. These words indicate the human interest frame. Another metaphor, "onschuldige vissen (...) na drie jaar terug te gooien [throw back innocent fish after three years]", refers to the impact for persons (Lubach, 2017).

Morality The morality frame is present in the broadcast by referring to expertise. According to Lubach, "gezaghebbende instanties [authoritative institutions]" as (among others) Raad voor de Rechtspraak (The Council for the Judiciary) criticized the new act (Lubach, 2017).

Necessity The necessity frame is explained in 'Description of causes'. Lubach mentions that the new act is necessary.

Insufficiency The insufficiency frame includes a description of the content of the act. The presenter reflects this frame by stating the opinion of the CTIVD. He explains that the CTIVD mentioned that the act is "te vaag [too vague]" (Lubach, 2017).

Almighty government The last frame which is identified in the broadcast is the almighty government frame. This frame mostly refers to the future consequences of the act. Lubach makes a reference to the current president of the United States: Donald Trump. According to the presenter, you can never know for sure which "gek [fool]" comes to power (Lubach, 2017). Lubach mentions that similar actions as implemented by Trump could become reality. The presenter supports his argument by saying: "bij alles bedenken dat de overheid misschien wel meekijkt [remember always that the government might watches you]" (Lubach, 2017).

6.2.2 College Tour The second television broadcast which is analysed in this research is College Tour. This programme is presented by Twan Huys. On 21 January 2018, the host interviewed the Director General of the AIVD Rob Bertholee.

6.2.2.1 Indicators Description of the situation In the broadcast of College Tour, the host of the emphasizes that there is “veel trammelant [much hassle]” about the new act, which resulted in the request for a referendum. The programme labels Arjen Lubach as the instigator of this referendum.

Description of causes The causes of the act are not explicitly mentioned in the programme. However, Rob Bertholee explains the presence of risks and the importance of national security.

Moral understanding Rob Bertholee uses the words “astronomisch klein [astronomically slim]” to describe the chance that AIVD will have personal data of a person whom is not a target (Huys, 2018). Furthermore, Bertholee mentions that the new act includes additional guarantees and additional source protection for journalists.

Proposed solutions In the broadcast of College Tour, Bertholee did not propose any solutions. However, the Director General did mention that the referendum is a complicated means because it only allows to vote for or against the act.

6.2.2.2 Frames Conflict The host of the programme mentions the discussion about the new act and the upcoming referendum. Moreover, Huys discusses that mostly young people are opponents of the act.

Human interest The human interest frame is named by referring to privacy. According to Bertholee, the chance of infringement of privacy is “erg klein [very slim]” (Huys, 2018). He explains that the services will “nooit zomaar [never just]” look into personal data (Huys, 2018).

Morality The morality frame is included in the television broadcast by a reference to democracy. Bertholee explains that the services operates “binnen de grenzen van de Nederlandse wet [within the boundaries of the Dutch law]” (Huys, 2018). Furthermore, he mentions that a referendum is a democratic means and the act has to accommodate to the outcome.

Responsibility The word “verantwoordelijkheid [responsibility]” reflects the responsibility frame (Huys, 2018). In the broadcast, the Director General explains that responsibility will still be assigned to the Dutch services whenever the services cooperate with foreign services.

Necessity Rob Bertholee labels the rejection of the new act as “onverstandig [unwise]” and marks the current safety situation in the Netherlands with a six because of risks (Huys, 2018). While Bertholee does not directly refer to the word necessity, his explanation indirectly mirrors this frame due to risks.

Importance The host presents the following choice to Bertholee: privacy or national security. Bertholee answers that his personal choice would be security. This choice reflects that Bertholee prefers security and shows the importance of security.

6.2.3 Conclusion The broadcasts of Zondag met Lubach and College Tour both show similarities and differences. Frames as the conflict frame, human interest frame and morality frame appear in both programmes. However, Lubach emphasizes the insufficiency, impact and danger of the act (for example the almighty government frame). On the other hand, Bertholee debunks the huge impact on civilians and guarantees the responsibility and importance of the services.

6.3 Websites In this research, three websites about the new act were analysed: www.sleepwet.nl, www.veiligheid-en-de-wiv.nl and www.wiv-onderdeloep.nl.

6.3.1 Indicators Description of the situation The analysed websites present the word ‘sleep(net)wet [drag(net) act)’ on their site. Sleepwet.nl also includes the term ‘sleepnet [dragnet]’ (Sleepwet, n.d.). Furthermore, the second website labels the debate about the act as “te simpel geframed [framed too simple]” (Veiligheid en de wiv, 2018, March 21).

Description of causes Sleepwet.nl does not mention a description of the causes. On the contrary, the two other websites do mention the necessity of the act. One of the websites describes the cause of the act as a necessity for national security (Van der Schans, 2018: 17).

Moral understanding Two of the three websites focus on the ‘negative’ impact of the new act. The “veiligheidsrisico’s [security risks]”, “onbekende kwetsbaarheden [unknown vulnerabilities]” and “dreiging van datalekken [threat of data leaks]” are mentioned on one of the websites (Veiligheid en de wiv, 2018, March 21). The other website emphasizes that the new act creates a “sleepnet [dragnet]” in order to “massaal online communicatie af te luisteren, ook van niet verdachte burgers [massively eavesdrop online communication, also of citizens whom are not suspects]” and eavesdrop “een hele wijk [a whole neighbourhood]” (Sleepwet, n.d.). In contrary to these websites, the third website is the only website which describes that the new act is “een betere waarborg voor de privacy [a better guarantee for the privacy]” (Van der Schans, 2018: 27).

Proposed solutions The website veiligheid-en-de-wiv.nl does not propose a solution for the situation. The other websites propose certain repairs of the act (Van der Schans, 2018: 47) and the referendum (Sleepwet, n.d.) as solutions.

6.3.2 Frames Conflict All the websites include the conflict frame. However, these websites all reflect the frame in different ways. The website wiv-onderdeloep.nl focuses on the conflict between the powers and the guarantees in the act as also suggested by the Commission Dessens. The website veiligheid- en-de-wiv.nl specifically makes a distinction between the proponents of the new act and the individuals whom undersigned the website (or in the website’s words: ‘wij [we]’). The website sleepwet.nl emphasizes the act on the one hand and freedom of citizens on the other hand.

Human interest The human interest frame is also identified on all three websites. The first website describes the “negatieve gevoelens [negative feelings]” and “zorgen [worries]” about the new act (Sleepwet, n.d.). The second website also mentions the concerns about the new act (Van der Schans, 2018: 25-52). The last website expressed that the “sleepnet [dragnet]” will be used on “willekeurige burgers [random citizens]” (Veiligheid en de wiv, 2018, March 21).

Morality Each website uses the morality frame. Sleepwet.nl reflects that the new act should not be implemented without a referendum (Sleepwet, n.d.). Wiv-onderdeloep.nl includes the sentence: “Laat je niet meeslepen [Do not get carried away]” (Van der Schans, 2018: 57). Finally, veiligheid-en-de-wiv.nl emphasizes that a certain security risk deserves a place in the debate (Veiligheid en de wiv, 2018, March 21).

Responsibility The responsibility frame is used once by Wil van der Schans by labelling the responsibility of the services as “zorgplicht [duty of care]” (Van der Schans, 2018: 27-28).

Economic consequences The following words were used to indicate the economic consequences frame: “ernstige economische schade [serious economic damage]” (Veiligheid en de wiv, 2018, March 21). This consequence is reflected on one of the three websites and is used to describe the effect of the vulnerabilities of the act.

Insufficiency In contrary to the last frame, the insufficiency is described on all analysed websites. Sleepwet.nl expresses that the act has “grote gevolgen [great consequences]” (Sleepwet, n.d.). Moreover, the website wiv-onderdeloep.nl mentions that opponents of the act fear that the TIB will function as “een stempelmachine [a stamping machine]” (Van der Schans, 2018: 53). On the other hand, veiligheid-en-de-wiv.nl emphasizes that there is no prove that the new powers will be the most appropriate means (Veiligheid en de wiv, 2018, March 21).

Necessity The necessity is reflected by two websites. The websites veiligheid-en-de-wiv.nl and wiv- onderdeloep.nl discuss the necessity of the new act on their websites.

Ignorance The words “een stuk gecompliceerder [a bit more complicated]” (Veiligheid en de wiv, 2018, March 21), “misverstand [misunderstanding]” (Van der Schans, 2018: 29) and “vaag begrip [vague concept]” (Van der Schans, 2018: 7) describe the ignorance frame on two of the three websites.

Exaggeration The website veiligheid-en-de-wiv.nl explicitly mentions the exaggeration frame. The argument of the proponents of the act about the necessity of the act concerning counterterrorism is labelled as “overdreven [exaggerated]” (Veiligheid en de wiv, 2018, March 21).

Importance The last frame is reflected once on the website veiligheid-en-de-wiv.nl. The importance frame is mirrored by the sentence “vind je privacy van groter belang [do you think that your privacy is of greater importance]” (Veiligheid en de wiv, 2018, March 21). On the website, the importance frame reflects the (‘false’) choice between privacy and national security.

6.3.3 Conclusion The three analysed websites imposed a variety of frames. While the website wiv-onderdeloep.nl offered a comprehensive view on the act, sleepwet.nl imposed a concise view on the act. The most dominant frames on the websites were the conflict, human interest, morality, necessity, insufficiency, necessity and ignorance frames. On the other hand, minor frames were the responsibility, economic consequences, exaggeration and importance frames.

6.4 Overall conclusion of the frames in the media Given the analysis mentioned above, several concluding remarks can be made. To begin with, the most dominant representations in all media sources were the references to conflict. Both the proponents and the opponents mentioned the conflict between privacy and national security (or between privacy and the act). Most media focused on certain aspects of the act, for instance by using the words ‘sleep(net)wet [drag(net) act]’ (or an equivalent). The words ‘onschuldige

63 mensen/burgers [innocent people/civilians]’ were also used frequently, both to debunk and to emphasize a statement. These words were used for both the human interest frame and the insufficiency frame. Furthermore, the necessity of the new act was mentioned by every media source, although some articles referred to words ‘noodzakelijk kwaad [necessary evil]’ in order to describe the necessity. While the morality, responsibility, exaggeration and ignorance frames only occurred in some articles of newspapers, these frames appeared in most sources and are thus also dominant representations.

On the other hand, some frames were minorly represented in the media sources. The economic consequences of the act were only mentioned in two newspapers (NRC Handelsblad and Volkskrant). NRC Handelsblad and Volkskrant were the newspapers with the most articles about the content of the act and presented the most variety of frames. The almighty government frame and the importance frame were also minority frames, which were only included in a few media sources. Lastly, the destructive frame and the ‘stowaway of democracy’ frame were only present in NRC Handelsblad, while the ‘state within a state’ frame was represented in one article in Volkskrant. A striking finding is that none of the analysed media mentioned the creation of the act or offered a comprehensive oversight of the evaluation by Commission Dessens and its findings.

The analysis of the media sources has shown that the media reflected the frames of the actors mentioned in the fifth chapter of this research. The dominant frames in the media sources match the frames used by the actors mentioned in the fifth chapter. In addition to the specific actors which were named in the media sources (especially in the news articles) as Bits of Freedom and Amnesty International, the sources also used frames and arguments which were often (previously) mentioned by important actors in the ‘Wiv’ discussion. An example is the term ‘sleepwet [drag act]’. This term was frequently by opponents of the new act, for example Amnesty International. Media named the term often, especially in the media reporting in 2017, when the referendum had yet to be officially announced. Another term, which was often stated by the media sources, was ‘onschuldige burgers [innocent citizens]’. This term was also constantly stated by the actors. The opponents used these words to emphasize their statement and the proponents used this term to debunk the argument of the opponents. Furthermore, the arguments of the proponents of the act (for example the necessity to timely notice threats, the exaggeration by the opponents and the introduction of guaranties or securities in the new act) are also reflected in the media. In this sense, the media is used as a display of the actors’

64 arguments. Frames of actors mentioned in the fifth chapter do largely correspond with the media sources. This shows that the actors’ frames were largely (on purpose or not) copied by the media sources, sometimes without references to the opponents or proponents. In this case, the media is a simple instrument that communicates and copies the point of views of the parties.

Moreover, a notable finding is that the way of reporting in the news articles seems to change over time. There are three remarkable changes. First, the use of the official name of the act increases in the course of time. The news articles in the first analysed time period (mainly the months September, October and November) show that the term ‘sleepwet [drag act]’ is often stated as a synonym for the act. In the last analysed weeks and month (mainly March), the official name of the act (or a neutral abbreviation of the name: ‘inlichtingen wet [intelligence act]’) was more often presented in the articles. Some articles in this period do not even mention the term ‘sleepwet [drag act]’. However, when other articles do name this term, there is frequently a reference to the use of this term by the opponents. By doing so, the writers of the articles seem to be more ‘careful’ with the use of this term, instead of ‘copying’ the term ‘blindly’. Secondly, the discussion about the new act is further widened in the news articles of the last weeks of the referendum campaign. The news articles of 2017 mostly focus on the right to privacy that would be infringed by the expansion of the services’ power to tap. On the other hand, the news articles of March 2018 mention the fallacies in the discussion, the conflicting opinions about the act between younger and older people and several other aspects of the act as the power to hack and the DNA database. While the articles before these last weeks were mostly dedicated to (the arguments of) opponents of the act about the expansion of the power to tap, the articles in the last weeks presented more nuanced and different arguments of opponents. This finding is connected to the third change. This last change shows that there is more diversity in the actors’ arguments in the articles of March 2018, in contrary to the previous articles. Both parties (opponents and proponents) are more often represented in these ‘March-articles’. The articles increasingly gave the floor to the proponents of the act.

7. Conclusion

In this chapter, the conclusion of this research will be discussed. Before providing an answer to the main research question, this chapter will provide answers to the four sub-questions.

The first sub-question is ‘What is framing?’. This theory is explained by Entman (1993) as the way to describe the strength of a text. The functions provided by Entman were used as indicators for this research: description of the situation, description of the causes, moral understanding and proposed solutions. Furthermore, five pre-defined frames of Semetko and Valkenburg (2000) were used: conflict frame, human interest frame, morality frame, responsibility frame and economic consequences frame. Moreover, the effects of valenced and negative frames is considered of profound influence. In the case of a referendum, the accessibility of frames, the content of the arguments and the effect of the referendum on the status quo are influential on the determination of the outcome of the referendum.

The second sub-question is ‘How were the Dutch intelligence and security services viewed by the society in the past?’. The fourth chapter elaborated on the views in society on the predecessor of the AIVD, the BVD. The service has faced negative imaging. A dominant view, which reoccurred, was that the service did not belong in a democracy. The secretive aspect of the service was in particular challenging for the public.

The third sub-question is ‘What does the new act entail?’. The Commission Dessens evaluated the Wiv 2002 and concluded that a new balance between national security and guarantees was needed. The new act includes both the enlargement of certain powers (for instance the power to non-specifically tap from cable-bound telecommunication) and guarantees (for instance binding decisions of the Review Board for the Exercise of Investigatory). The motives for these changes differ. The reactions in society also differed. Opponents (among others organization Amnesty International) fear for the privacy of citizens. On the other hand, proponents stress the necessity of the new act.

The fourth sub-question is ‘How is the act framed in the Dutch media?’. Five different newspapers (Algemeen Dagblad, Telegraaf, NRC Handelsblad, Trouw and Volkskrant), two television broadcasts (Zondag met Lubach and College Tour) and three websites

(www.sleepwet.nl, www.veiligheid-en-de-wiv.nl and www.wiv-onderdeloep.nl) were analysed. The most dominant pre-defined frames of Semetko and Valkenburg (2000) were the conflict frame, the human interest frame and the morality frame. Next to the pre-defined frames, the following frames were newly identified: necessity, insufficiency, exaggeration, ignorance, importance, almighty government, destructive, ‘stowaway of the democracy’ and ‘state within a state’. The last two frames are based on the metaphors identified by Hijzen (2018). The almighty government frame shows similarities with the previous defined frame of Hijzen: “a state within a state” (Hijzen, 2018: 23). However, the Hijzen’s frame focuses on the services as powerful, while the almighty government frame assigns this characteristic to the government.

In the analysed newspapers of the first weeks, the articles copied terms from (dominant) actors in the Wiv discussion, sometimes without any nuance or reference to these actors. As mentioned in chapter five of this research, multiple actors (both proponents and opponents of the act) used the terms ‘innocent civilians’ and ‘drag act’ frequently. However, the articles increasingly used the official name of the act towards the last weeks of the referendum campaign. The term ‘drag act’ was still mentioned, but more nuance was made by referring to the opponents of the act when naming this term.

Overall, the media sources acknowledge that the old act from 2002 is outdated and the new act will have consequences for privacy. Another aspect, which is acknowledged, but given minor status in the media sources, is the existence of security services. While Hijzen’s (2018) metaphor of a ruin explains that the public does not understand the utility of the services, the analysed media sources do not reflect this metaphor. In contrast to this finding, society now seems to accept the existence of the services in these times, although the utility of the services is not explicitly mentioned. Another aspect, which is given minor status, is the fact that most citizens willingly put personal information on the internet through multiple private companies (for instance Facebook). Furthermore, a notable effect, which the analysed media generate, is confusion. The media speak of various aspects and reflect different statements of both proponents, opponents, experts and public. This results in disorientation about the facts and opinions which might result in confusion about ‘what is truth or what is false’. This effect is especially notable in the news articles in the last weeks of the referendum campaign. It can be concluded that the news about the new act included more different and nuanced views of the opponents and this widened the discussion in these weeks. Moreover, the proponents and their

67 arguments were more often reflected in these weeks than the weeks before. This resulted in more information for the audience.

Taking this into account, the framing theory of Entman (1993) explains that a particular understanding might be connected to an event (in this case the new act) when there is emphasis on some aspects and/or repetition of certain words. The analysed media sources about the new act show that the term ‘sleep(net)wet [drag(net) act]’ is often repeated and certain aspects are highlighted. In this way, some other aspects of the act are neglected, for example the certain guarantees in the act. This could result in a distorted, biased or one-sided image of the act. The associations of the audience with the act might be directed at these highlighted aspects and the term ‘sleep(net)wet [drag(net) act]’.

On 21 March 2018, a small majority of voters voted against the new act. This research indicates that there is a correlation between the frames used in the media and the outcome of the referendum. Within the media, there was a focus on certain terms of the act which emphasized the extension of the special power to collect data through cable-bound telecommunication. This emphasis presents this aspect as the most crucial feature of the new act. Moreover, this focus has created the image that the discussion is a choice between privacy and security, which is supported by the opponents and indicates a fundamental ideological choice. While some media mentioned that this choice is a false choice, the majority of the analysed media still presented this choice as the underlying subject of the referendum. The impact of the new act in the media is often related to the prevention of terrorism and the infringement of privacy, with emphasis on the latter. The dominant argument of opponents, which indicates that whole neighbourhoods will be subjected to the power to tap, creates a negative image of the services and their methods. Together with ‘the nicknames’ which are used in the media for the act, these aspects show the result and the power of repetition of certain words in the media. Furthermore, the advice to vote against the act is more often explicitly reflected in the media, while the advice to vote in favour of the act is rarely represented.

It seems that the opponents of the act have had an advance in the media. Their examples and arguments are repeated and mentioned the most. On the other hand, the proponents of the act spent most of their arguments on trying to debunk the arguments and frames of the opponents. This inequality reflects the one-sidedness of the discussion. As explained in the broadcast of College Tour, the confidentiality of the services and their work restricts them to give concrete

68 examples of their methods. Only one article in Telegraaf gave a more explicit description of how the act would benefit the services and the country. The ignorance about the services and their new act on the one hand and the negative frames of the act that predominated in the media on the other hand, show the connection with the negative outcome of the referendum.

According to the theory of framing, frames are able to influence the attitude, cognitive complexity and behaviour of individuals. Valenced frames can have an effect on these features of individuals. Negative valenced frames especially, have a greater effect than positive frames (De Vreese, Boomgaarden and Semetko, 2011: 194). In this research, the negative valenced frames were in the majority. Frames as the conflict frame, human interest frame and almighty government frame include negatively valenced aspects. The human interest frame in particular made many references to negative emotions and consequences, such as fear and anxiety. The almighty government frame also used words, which inherently have negative representations, such as ‘North Korea’ and ‘George Orwells 1984’. Furthermore, the frequently mentioned words as ‘sleep(net)wet [drag(net) act]) and ‘innocent people/citizens’ also indicate negativity in a sense. These words both emphasize the opponents’ negative view on the act.

The framing theory also explains the effect of the frames in the analysed media sources on the point of view of individuals and the outcome of the referendum. As explained by Wettstein (2012), salience and accessibility of these frames are important for the adoption of frames (p. 320). In this research, the analysis has shown that the negative frames were constantly present in the media, especially the term ‘sleep(net)wet [drag(net) act])’ and the appeal to privacy. The positive frames were present to a lesser extent. The salience of the negative frames shows that these frames were also more accessible to the public.

A part of the accessibility is whether these frames are understandable for the public (Wettstein, 2012: 322). The frames used in the media concerning the Wiv act/referendum differ in this sense in their degree of accessibility. The negative frames were more understandable for the public than the positive frames. This was caused by the content that supported these frames. The arguments of opponents were bolstered by the reference to organizations as Amnesty International, yet ‘reputable’ organizations as the Council of State were also linked to these statements. Furthermore, the opponents gave many (sometimes exaggerated) examples of the consequences of the act in practice. While several examples might be untrue, these examples could be used by the public as an instrument to understand and interpret their arguments. The

69 same goes for the experts, which substantiated the negative consequences of the act (for example the impact of hacking and the DNA database), in the media. These experts made it easier for the public to digest the information about these consequences. While the arguments of proponents were also clarified by examples and experts (for example the Director General of the AIVD), these examples and experts were limited in scope and could not give in-depth information because of the secrecy and confidentiality of the services. There is no option for them to explain the tactics the services will use or concrete examples of how the services will prevent (for example) terrorism under this new act. It might therefore be harder for the audience to understand why the services have previously prevented attacks under the Wiv 2002, but currently need an expansion of their powers.

Another part of the framing theory, which explains the influence of the frames on the outcome of the referendum, is the finding of De Vreese and Semetko (2004). According to these researchers, widening the scope of the debate and turning the discussion into “a more fundamental ideological discussion”, benefits actors with convincing the public of their point of view (p. 714-715). Despite of the question whether the information in the media concerning the negative aspects of the Wiv was false or true, the opponents of the act were able to widen the scope of the discussion in the media. As previously mentioned, the proponents of the act promoted the necessity of the act, the guarantees in the act and debunked the arguments of the opponents. Their points focused mostly on the direct consequences of the act: preventing attacks, providing security and guaranteeing the rights of citizens. Their arguments relate to the society, which would benefit as a whole from the act. The opponents on the other hand broadened the discussion by connecting the act to indirect consequences and consequences for the individual. According to them, the act would affect the individual by infringing its privacy. Some opponents claimed that an indirect consequence of the act would be that the government would gain more power, which will increase the risk of an almighty government or the misuse of power. Furthermore, the arguments of the act’s consequences for the safety risks and the DNA database proved that the opponents broadened the discussion to other political issues: discrimination, economics and criminal law. In this sense, the opponents of the act made the discussion more fundamentally ideological.

Lastly, the findings of Schuck and De Vreese (2009) also support the correlation between the frames in the media and the outcome of the referendum. As explained in the theoretical framework, these researchers found that frames of opposing actors are able to mobilize voters

70 to vote for ‘the other side’. The reason for this mobilization is caused by the alteration in the status quo, which will follow when the opposing actors have successfully influenced the outcome of the referendum. The probability of loss therefore motivates these voters. In the Wiv referendum, the positive frames were also capable to have an influence on the NO voters. A positive outcome of the referendum would have altered the situation before the referendum (status quo), because the proposed act would introduce extended powers of the services and more guarantees. Opponents of the act especially see the extended powers of the services as a loss of privacy. While the positive frames in the media were in the minority, this probability of loss could still have mobilized NO voters to vote against the act. This is because the frames of proponents in the media increased the last weeks of the referendum. On the other hand, the proponents of the act had less to lose. A negative outcome of the referendum would leave the status quo (the Wiv 2002) intact. For this reason, the negative frames could not have the same effect on YES voters as the positive frames on NO voters. While the proponents argue that security against attacks is not guaranteed under the Wiv 2002, the loss of privacy under the new Wiv is a more certain loss than the loss of security under the Wiv 2002.

In conclusion, the framing theories in combination with the frames of the new act in the media explain the correlation between the frames and the outcome of the referendum. The framing theory explains that both the positive frames and the great accessibility of negative frames were able to influence the NO voters. The ability of the negative frames to broaden the discussion can been seen as a further contribution to the opponents’ win of the referendum. It can be concluded that the dominant frames correspond with the outcome of the referendum.

Discussion This research has included a methodology which focussed on different media sources and a selection of different newspapers in order to identify the frames used in the media. Yet, this research contains some limitations. Due to feasibility, the research focused on the newspaper coverages, because written media are able to report “more complex ideas” (McNair, 2000: 136). This aspect causes that the research might not include frames communicated by different sources or excluded newspapers. Another limitation of this research is the bias of the writer. Since the media sources were analysed by one person, certain frames might be overlooked or interpreted differently due to underlying subjectivity. This aspect could be improved by letting several persons analyse the data or check the analysis. Furthermore, this research does not conclude whether voters actually used the media for their decision. A possible new research

71 might focus on whether and how the voters used the media to inform themselves and to make a choice. Moreover, it should be noted that the media largely copied terms of influential actors in the discussion. Therefore, it is hard to distinguish whether the media purposively adopted these frames or carelessly took them over from the different actors. Potential future research could focus on the intentions of the writers when writing/making these texts/media sources.

Bibliography

AIVD (n.d.). Waarom is een nieuwe Wiv nodig? Retrieved from https://www.aivd.nl/onderwerpen/nieuwe-wet-op-de-inlichtingen--en- veiligheidsdiensten/waarom-is-een-nieuwe-wiv-nodig

Amnesty International (2015, August 31). Bijdrage Amnesty International consultatie Wet op de inlichtingen en veiligheidsdiensten 20XX. Appendix no. 787324 of Parliamentary Papers II, 34588, no. 3 (2016, November 1). Retrieved from https://zoek.officielebekendmakingen.nl/blg- 787324

Amnesty International (n.d.). Sleepwet bedreiging voor mensenrechten. Retrieved from https://www.amnesty.nl/mensenrechten-in-nederland/veiligheid-en-mensenrechten/sleepwet

Bindt, P. (2018, February 21). Nieuwe Wet op Inlichtingen en Veiligheidsdiensten biedt goede balans tussen taken, bevoegdheden en waarborgen: Inzake enkele hardnekkige twijfels en aannames. TPO. Retrieved from http://politiek.tpo.nl/column/pieter-bindt-de-nieuwe-wet-op- de-inlichtingen-en-veiligheidsdiensten-biedt-een-goede-balans-tussen-taken-bevoegdheden- en-waarborgen/

Bits of Freedom (2015, September 1). Reactie op consultatie Wet op de inlichtingen- en veiligheidsdiensten 20XX. Appendix no. 787334 of Parliamentary Papers II, 34588, no. 3 (2016, November 1). Retrieved from https://zoek.officielebekendmakingen.nl/blg-787334

Bits of Freedom (n.d.) Sleepnet voor geheime diensten. Retrieved from https://www.bof.nl/dossiers/sleepnet/

Bits of Freedom, Free Press Unlimited and Internet Society (n.d). FAQ. Retrieved from https://geensleep.net/#faq

Commission Dessens (2013), Evaluatie Wet op de inlichtingen- en veiligheidsdiensten 2002 – Naar een nieuwe balans tussen bevoegdheden en waarborgen. Retrieved from https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/documenten/rapporten/2013/12/02/rapport-evaluatie-wiv-2002

Dekavalla, M. (2016). Framing referendum campaigns: the 2014 Scottish independence referendum in the press. Media, Culture & Society, 38(6), 793-810.

Dielemans, R. (2018). De Wiv 2002 en Wiv 2017 op enkele hoofdlijnen vergeleken. Justitiële verkenningen, 44(1), 68-84.

Ellian, A. (2010). De scheiding tussen inlichtingen en opsporing: van spionage en contraspionage naar contraterrorisme. In B.A. de Graaf, E.R. Muller & J.A. van Reijn (Eds.), Inlichtingen- en Veiligheidsdiensten. Alphen aan den Rijn: Kluwer.

Engelen, D. (2007). Frontdienst. De BVD in de Koude Oorlog. Amsterdam: Boom.

Engelen, D. (2010). Mars door de tijd van een institutie: beknopte geschiedenis van de AIVD. In B.A. de Graaf, E.R. Muller & J.A. van Reijn (Eds.), Inlichtingen- en Veiligheidsdiensten. Alphen aan den Rijn: Kluwer.

Entman, R.M. (1991). Framing U.S. coverage of international news: Contrasts in narratives of the KAL and Iran air incidents. Journal of Communication, 41(4), 6–27.

Entman, R.M. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 51-58.

Entman, R.M. & Rojecki, A. (1993). Freezing out the public: Elite and media framing of the U.S. anti‐nuclear movement. Political Communication, 10(2), 155-173.

Free Press Unlimited (n.d.). Sleepnet desastreus voor de journalistiek. Retrieved from https://www.freepressunlimited.org/nl/sleepnet-desastreus-voor-de-journalistiek

Frissen, P. (2016). Het geheim van de laatste staat: Kritiek van de transparantie. Amsterdam: Boom.

De Graaff, B. & Hijzen, C. (2018). Zwijgen is zilver en spreken is goud. Justitiële verkenningen, 44(1), 148-157.

Hallahan, K. (1999). Seven Models of Framing: Implications for Public Relations. Journal of Public Relations Research, 11(3), 205-242.

Hijzen, C. (2018). Paddenstoelen, prikkeldraadversperringen en sleepnetten. Metaforen in de Nederlandse inlichtingengeschiedenis. Justitiële verkenningen, 44(1), 11-32.

Kahneman, D. and Tversky, A. (1979). An Analysis of Decision under Risk. Econometrica, 47(2), 263-292.

Kiesraad (n.d.). Advisory referendum. Retrieved from https://english.kiesraad.nl/elections/advisory-referendum

Kiesraad (2017a, November 3). Referendum on the Intelligence and Security Services Act gets green light. Retrieved from https://english.kiesraad.nl/latest-news/news/2017/11/referendum- on-the-intelligence-and-security-services-act-gets-green-light/index

Kiesraad (2017b, September 1). Inleidend verzoek referendum over Wiv toegelaten. Retrieved from https://www.kiesraad.nl/actueel/nieuws/2017/09/01/inleidend-verzoek-referendum-over- wiv-toegelaten

McNair, B. (2000). Journalism and Democracy : An Evaluation of the Political Public Sphere. London: Routledge.

Van Meurs, R. (1978). De BVD. Samenzweren tegen ambtenaren, studenten, journalisten, dominees en andere democraten. Amsterdam: Van Gennep.

Muller, E.R. (2010). Taken en bevoegdheden inlichtingen- en veiligheidsdiensten. In B.A. de Graaf, E.R. Muller & J.A. van Reijn (Eds.), Inlichtingen- en Veiligheidsdiensten. Alphen aan den Rijn: Kluwer.

Muller, E.R. and Voermans, W. (2017). Nieuwe Wet op de Inlichtingen- en Veiligheidsdiensten: Een nieuw evenwicht tussen veiligheid en waarborgen. Nederlands Juristenblad, 95(2), 102-109.

Nieman, R. (Host). (2017, October 22). WNL op Zondag [Television broadcast]. Amsterdam: Wij Nederland (WNL)

NOS (2018, February 8). Voorstanders 'aftapwet' laten campagnegeld voor referendum liggen. NOS. Retrieved from https://nos.nl/artikel/2216058-voorstanders-aftapwet-laten- campagnegeld-voor-referendum-liggen.html

Parliamentary Paper II, 30 553, no. 2 (2006, May 17). Retrieved from https://zoek.officielebekendmakingen.nl/dossier/30553/kst-30553- 2?resultIndex=34&sorttype=1&sortorder=4

Parliamentary Papers II, 30 588, no. 2 (2016, November 1). Retrieved from https://zoek.officielebekendmakingen.nl/kst-34588- 2.html?zoekcriteria=%3fzkt%3dEenvoudig%26pst%3d%26vrt%3d34588%26zkd%3dInDeGe heleText%26dpr%3dAfgelopenDag%26spd%3d20180413%26epd%3d20180414%26sdt%3d DatumBrief%26ap%3d%26pnr%3d11%26rpp%3d10%26_page%3d10%26sorttype%3d1%26 sortorder%3d4&resultIndex=95&sorttype=1&sortorder=4

Parliamentary Papers II, 34 588, no. 3 (2016, November 1). Retrieved from https://zoek.officielebekendmakingen.nl/dossier/34588/kst-34588- 3?resultIndex=93&sorttype=1&sortorder=4

Privacy First (2018, March 13). ABC tegen de Sleepwet. Retrieved from https://www.privacyfirst.nl/aandachtsvelden/sleepwet/item/1108-abc-tegen-de-sleepwet.html

Rijksoverheid (2013, December 2). Commissie-Dessens: Wet op de Inlichtingen- en Veiligheidsdiensten moet worden aangepast. Retrieved from https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/actueel/nieuws/2013/12/02/commissie-dessens-wet-op-de- inlichtingen-en-veiligheidsdiensten-moet-worden-aangepast

Scheufele, D.A. (1999). Framing as a Theory of Media Effects. Journal of Communication, 49(1), 103-122.

Schuck, A.R.T. and De Vreese, C.H. (2006). Between Risk and Opportunity: News Framing and its Effects on Public Support for EU Enlargement. European Journal of Communication, 21(1), 5-32.

Schuck, A.R.T. and De Vreese, C.H. (2009). Reversed Mobilization in Referendum Campaigns: How Positive News Framing Can Mobilize the Skeptics. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 14(1), 40-66.

Semetko, H.A. and Valkenburg, P.M. (2000). Framing European Politics: A Content Analysis of Press and Television News. Journal of Communication, 50(2), 93-109.

Shah, D.V., Kwak, N., Schmierbach, M. and Zubrich, J. (2004). The Interplay of News Frames on Cognitive Complexity. Human Communication Research, 30(1), 102-120.

Verhoeven, N. (2010). Toezicht op inlichtingen- en veiligheidsdiensten. In B.A. de Graaf, E.R. Muller & J.A. van Reijn (Eds.), Inlichtingen- en Veiligheidsdiensten. Alphen aan den Rijn: Kluwer.

Voor de Ommekeer TV (2018, March 20). Pieter Cobelens over Wiv-referendum en veiligheid in NL #VDOTV [Youtube]. Retrieved from http://www.voordeommekeer.nl/uncategorized/vdo-tv-pieter-cobelens-over-wiv-referendum- en-veiligheid-in-nederland/

Voskuil, K. (2017, October 8). Dankzij vijf studenten krijgt Nederland weer een referendum. Algemeen Dagblad. Retrieved from https://www.ad.nl/binnenland/dankzij-vijf-studenten- krijgt-nederland-weer-een-referendum~ac88813b/

De Vreese, C. H. (2005). News framing: Theory and typology. Information Design Journal + Document Design, 13(1), 51-62.

De Vreese, C.H., Boomgaarden, H.G. and Semetko, H.A. (2011). (In)direct Framing Effects: The Effects of News Media Framing on Public Support for Turkish Membership in the European Union. Communication Research, 38(2), 179-205.

De Vreese, C.H. and Semetko, H.A. (2004). News matters: Influences on the vote in the Danish 2000 euro referendum campaign. European Journal of Political Research, 43(5), 699-722.

Wettstein, M. (2012). Frame Adoption in Referendum Campaigns: The Effect of News Coverage on the Public Salience of Issue Interpretations. American Behavioral Scientist, 56(3), 318-333.

Wiv 2002: Wet op de inlichtingen- en veiligheidsdiensten 2002 (2002, February 7). Retrieved from https://zoek.officielebekendmakingen.nl/stb-2002- 148.html?zoekcriteria=%3fzkt%3dUitgebreid%26pst%3dTractatenblad%257cStaatsblad%25 7cStaatscourant%257cGemeenteblad%257cProvinciaalblad%257cWaterschapsblad%257cBla dGemeenschappelijkeRegeling%257cParlementaireDocumenten%26vrt%3dWet%2bop%2bd e%2binlichtingen- %2ben%2bveiligheidsdiensten%2b2002%26zkd%3dInDeGeheleText%26dpr%3dAnderePeri ode%26spd%3d20020301%26epd%3d20020630%26sdt%3dDatumPublicatie%26ap%3d%26 pnr%3d3%26rpp%3d10%26_page%3d2%26sorttype%3d1%26sortorder%3d4&resultIndex=1 9&sorttype=1&sortorder=4

Wiv 2017: Wet op de inlichtingen- en veiligheidsdiensten 2017 (2017, July 26). Retrieved from https://zoek.officielebekendmakingen.nl/stb-2017- 317.html?zoekcriteria=%3fzkt%3dEenvoudig%26pst%3d%26vrt%3d34588%26zkd%3dInDe GeheleText%26dpr%3dAfgelopenDag%26spd%3d20180414%26epd%3d20180415%26sdt% 3dDatumBrief%26ap%3d%26pnr%3d2%26rpp%3d10%26_page%3d1%26sorttype%3d1%26 sortorder%3d4&resultIndex=9&sorttype=1&sortorder=4

WODC (2018). Geheime diensten en de democratische rechtsstaat: inleiding. Justitiële verkenningen, 44(1), 6-10.

Analysed newspaper articles

Algemeen Dagblad Akyol, Ö. (2018, March 20). Sleepwet. Algemeen Dagblad, p. 2.

Hoedeman, J. and Winterman, P. (2018, March 3). Plan B bij ‘nee’ in referendum tegen aftapwet. Algemeen Dagblad, p. 3.

Hoedeman, J. and Winterman, P. (2018, March 17). Aan ‘NEE’ wil Ollongren niet denken. Algemeen Dagblad, p. 13.

Kok, L. and Van Soest, H. (2017, November 25). ‘De Russen stoken hier vuurtjes op’. Algemeen Dagblad, p. 4-5.

Van Soest, H. (2017, November 2). Sleepwet. Algemeen Dagblad, p. 26.

Oosterhoff, R. (2017, October 6). Het loopt storm voor petitie tegen sleepwet. Algemeen Dagblad, p. 10.

Rosman, C. (2018, March 17). ‘Als mensen ‘voor’ stemmen uit angst voor terreur, dan hebben wij het niet goed gedaan’. Algemeen Dagblad, p. 12.

Rosman, C. and Winterman, P. (2018, March 21). Zo geheim dat u zelf niet weet wat u stemt. Algemeen Dagblad, p. 8-9.

Voskuil, K. (2017, October 9). Naar stembus, dankzij Lubach. Algemeen Dagblad, p. 10.

Winterman, P. and Rosman, C. (2018, March 15). Alles wat u moet weten over de sleepwet. Algemeen Dagblad, p. 8-9.

Telegraaf Hoogland, R. (2018, March 20). Big Brother. Telegraaf, p. 5.

Schuckink Kool, R. (2018, March 13). Column: Big Brother. Telegraaf. Retrieved from https://www.telegraaf.nl/financieel/1785632/column-big-brother

Telegraaf (2017a, October 10). Sleepnet. Telegraaf. p. 2.

Telegraaf (2017b, October 10). Referendum tapwet nabij. Telegraaf, p. 7.

Telegraaf (2017, November 1). Omstreden ’sleepwet’ uitgesteld. Telegraaf. p. 6.

Telegraaf (2017, November 2). Genoeg bijval referendum. Telegraaf, p. 4.

Telegraaf (2018, January 31). Hypocriet. Telegraaf, p. 2.

Telegraaf (2018, February 27). Toezichthouder kan werken met ’sleepwet’. Telegraaf. Retrieved from https://www.telegraaf.nl/nieuws/1727510/toezichthouder-kan-werken-met- sleepwet

Telegraaf (2018, March 3). GroenLinks wil drie aanpassingen ’aftap’. Telegraaf. Retrieved from https://www.telegraaf.nl/nieuws/1744150/groen-links-wil-drie-aanpassingen-aftap

Telegraaf (2018, March 10). Polderspion vecht met hand op de rug. Telegraaf, p. 26.

Telegraaf (2018a, March 17). Alles over de Wiv, tapwet of sleepwet. Telegraaf. Retrieved from https://www.telegraaf.nl/nieuws/1800945/alles-over-de-wiv-tapwet-of-sleepwet

Telegraaf (2018b, March 17). ’Tinder weet meer over je dan de AIVD’. Telegraaf. Retrieved from https://www.telegraaf.nl/nieuws/1800878/tinder-weet-meer-over-je-dan-de-aivd

Telegraaf (2018c, March 17). Inlichtingenwet vergroot risico op hack. Telegraaf. Retrieved from https://www.telegraaf.nl/nieuws/1800934/inlichtingenwet-vergroot-risico-op-hack

Telegraaf (2018, March 19). ’Sleepwet’ onder vergrootglas. Telegraaf, p. 8.

Telegraaf (2018a, March 21). Nog even, en Orwells 1984 is een feit. Telegraaf. p. 11.

Telegraaf (2018b, March 21). Felle toon in laatste debat inlichtingenwet. Telegraaf. Retrieved from https://www.telegraaf.nl/nieuws/1814205/felle-toon-in-laatste-debat-inlichtingenwet

NRC Handelsblad Februari, M. (2018, March 19). Ik ga nee zeggen. Maak maar een nieuwe wet. NRC Handelsblad. Retrieved from https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2018/03/19/ik-ga-nee-zeggen-maak- maar-een-nieuwe-wet-a1596255

Van den Dool, P. and Van Lonkhuyzen, L. (2017, November 1). Referendum over ‘sleepwet’ gaat definitief door. NRC Handelsblad, p. 2.

Van den Dool, P. and Niemantsverdriet, T. (2018, February 13). Intelwet is nog geen campagnehit. NRC Handelsblad, p. 8.

Van den Dool, P. and Niemantsverdriet, T. (2018, March 17). ‘Ik heb niets te verbergen’. NRC Handelsblad, p. 8.

Koning, M. (2018, March 19). Wiv-referendum: te simpel geframed. NRC Handelsblad, p. 18.

Van Lonkhuyzen, L. (2017, October 5). Referendum over ‘sleepwet’ dichtbij. NRC Handelsblad, p. 1.

Van Lonkhuyzen, L. (2017, October 10). Het ‘Sleepwetreferendum’ komt er zo goed als zeker, met dank aan Arjen Lubach. NRC Handelsblad, p. 6.

Van Lonkhuyzen, L. (2018, March 1). ‘POLITICI AFWEZIG IN DEBAT OVER INLICHTINGENWET’. NRC Handelsblad. Retrieved from https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2018/03/01/ja-kamp-intelwet-is-strategisch-stil- a1594166?utm_source=NRC&utm_medium=banner&utm_campaign=Paywall

Van Lonkhuyzen, L. (2018, March 12). Al sinds de jaren vijftig bang voor het ‘net’ van de geheime dienst. NRC Handelsblad. Retrieved from https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2018/03/12/al- sinds-jaren-vijftig-bang-voor-net-geheime-dienst-a1595251

M’charek, A. and De Knijff, P. (2018, March 20). Sleepwet zet 25 jaar DNA-strafwetgeving bij oud vuil. NRC Handelsblad. Retrieved from

81 https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2018/03/20/sleepwet-zet-25-jaar-dna-strafwetgeving-bij-oud-vuil- twee-regels-a1596375

Meeus, T.J. (2018, January 25). Sleepwet: stotteren met Thierry & Joost. NRC Handelsblad, p. 2.

Niemantsverdriet, T. and Van den Dool, P. (2018, March 1). Ja-kamp inlichtingenwet is strategisch stil. NRC Handelsblad. Retrieved from https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2018/03/01/ja- kamp-intelwet-is-strategisch-stil- a1594166?utm_source=NRC&utm_medium=banner&utm_campaign=Paywall

NRC Handelsblad (2018, February 3). ‘Ik wilde wel een keertje zelf de politieke baas zijn’. NRC Handelsblad, p. 14.

NRC Handelsblad (2018, February 10). Bent u voor of tegen de Wet op de Inlichtingen- en veiligheidsdiensten 2017? NRC Handelsblad, p. 12.

NRC Handelsblad (2018, March 17). Betere inlichtingenwet is gebaat bij een nee-stem. NRC Handelsblad, p. 10.

NRC Handelsblad (2018, March 20). Het wordt 'Nee'; die wet kan beter. NRC Handelsblad, p. 4.

Olsthoorn, P. (2017, October 2). Aanname sleepnetwet schendt geen mensenrecht. NRC Handelsblad, p. 18.

Steketee, H. (2018, March 17). 3 Twistgesprek Wiv-debat, nuttig of niet? NRC Handelsblad, p. 1.

Versteegh, K. and Van Lonkhuyzen, L. (2017, November 1). Voorkomt de ‘sleepwet’ aanslagen? NRC Handelsblad, p. 10.

Versteegh, K., Van Lonkhuyzen, L., Van den Dool, P. and Van Wieren, A. (2018, March 20). Waarom zou je voor of tegen de Inlichtingenwet stemmen? NRC Handelsblad, p. 12.

Weeda, F. (2018, March 21). Dorp Weesp is verdeeld over de grote stad. NRC Handelsblad, p. 6.

Van de Wiel, C. (2017, October 30). Ook VVD en CU willen sleepwet ondanks referendum. NRC Handelsblad, p. 8.

Trouw Abels, R. (2018, February 22). Sleepwet mag niet zo heten bij referendum. Trouw, p. 1.

Bos, M. (2018, March 21). Hoe meer we over de Wiv horen, hoe minder we weten. Trouw, p. 16.

Klein Jan, G.J. (2018, January 8). Studenten met een ideaal. Trouw, p. 2-3.

Naafs, S. and Van Teeffelen, K. (2018, March 14). Computer zoekt terrorist. Trouw, p. 4-5.

Van Teeffelen, K. (2017, October 3). Dit zijn de gevolgen van de omstreden 'sleepwet'. Trouw. Retrieved from https://www.trouw.nl/democratie/dit-zijn-de-gevolgen-van-de-omstreden- sleepwet-~a034d0e4/

Van Teeffelen, K. (2017, October 10). Opeens veel steun voor referendum. Trouw, p. 3.

Van Teeffelen, K. (2018, March 9). Veiligheidsdiensten meer bevoegdheden geven: ja of nee? Trouw, p. 4-5.

Van Teeffelen, K. (2018, March 20). Hoe jonger, hoe kritischer over nieuwe inlichtingenwet. Trouw, p. 5.

Van Teeffelen, K. (2018, March 21). Overdrijvingen en valse tegenstellingen: alles was geoorloofd. Trouw, p. 6.

Trouw (2017, October 7). Huisartsen tegen nieuwe tapwet. Trouw, p. 10.

Trouw (2017, October 30). Buma: Uitslag referendum sleepwet wordt genegeerd. Trouw, p. 7.

Trouw (2018, February 28). ‘Sleepwet’ doet ook recht aan burger, zegt toezichthouder. Trouw, p. 8.

Trouw (2018, March 21). Pas op de plaats met referendum. Trouw, p. 21.

De Vries, N. (2018, February 21). Toezeggingen over sleepwet bieden burgers geen bescherming. Trouw, p. 21.

De Wijk, R. (2017, November 3). Mosterd na de maaltijd. Trouw, p. 25.

De Wijk, R. (2018, March 2). Wat moet anders aan de ‘sleepwet’? Trouw, p. 23.

De Wijk, R. (2018, March 16). Alsof de privacy door de sleepwet meer in het geding is dan bij Google of Facebook. Trouw. Retrieved from https://www.trouw.nl/home/alsof-de-privacy- door-de-sleepwet-meer-in-het-geding-is-dan-bij-google-of-facebook~ac7a2a0d/

Wijn, A. (2018, March 20). Vertrouwen in internet, maar niet in de AIVD. Trouw, p. 5.

Zuidervaart, B. (2018, March 9). In stilte richting het referendum. Trouw, p. 4-5.

Volkskrant Besselink, N. (2017, September 8). Referendum over nieuwe tapwet hangt in de lucht. Volkskrant, p. 9.

Bolwijn, M. (2018, March 17). Wiv vergroot kans op hacks, waarschuwen deskundigen; AIVD reageert: 'Alleen privacyinbreuk bij burgers die gevaar zijn'. Volkskrant. Retrieved from https://www.volkskrant.nl/binnenland/wiv-vergroot-kans-op-hacks-waarschuwen- deskundigen-aivd-reageert-alleen-privacyinbreuk-bij-burgers-die-wet-overtreden~a4581668/

Bolwijn, M. and Modderkolk, H. (2018, March 20). Bent u voor of tegen de Wet op de inlichtingen- en veiligheidsdiensten (Wiv)? Volkskrant, p. 6-7.

Dessens, S. (2018, March 16). Zet veiligheidsdiensten niet op achterstand. Volkskrant, p. 23.

Hendrickx, F. and Meijer, R. (2017, October 28). Kabinet zal ‘nee’ bij referendum sleepwet negeren. Volkskrant, p. 5.

Kraak, H. (2017, October 14). Waar moderne dominee Arjen Lubach preekt, daar volgen zijn kijkers. Volkskrant, p. 18-19.

Meijer, R. (2017, November 2). KIESRAAD STAAT REFERENDUM OVER ‘SLEEPWET’ TOE. Volkskrant, p. 4.

Meijer, R. (2018, March 19). O ja, het referendum over de ‘sleepwet’. Volkskrant, p. 7.

Modderkolk, H. (2017, September 22). Vreest u de sleepwet? Volkskrant, p. 12-13.

Modderkolk, H. (2017, October 10). Wéér een referendum: haalt het nu wel iets uit? Volkskrant, p. 8.

Modderkolk, H. (2018, February 2). Hacken is voor AIVD fijner dan aftappen. Volkskrant, p. 9.

Von Piekartz, H. (2018, March 16). Jong tegen oud bij referendum inlichtingenwet. Volkskrant, p. 14.

Righton, N. (2017, October 30). Buma krijgt weinig steun voor negeren referendum. Volkskrant, p. 2.

Van Schaik, L. and Brongers, K. (2018, January 30). AIVD-succes maakt sleepwet overbodig. Volkskrant, p. 22.

Schouten, I. (2018, March 21). Nieuwe inlichtingenwet. Volkskrant, p. 25.

Trapman, L. (2018, February 22). Nieuwe inlichtingenwet hindert bronbescherming journalisten. Volkskrant, p. 22.

Volkskrant (2018, March 19). Waarschuwing voor risico’s nieuwe ‘sleepwet’. Volkskrant, p. 4.

De Vries, J. (2018, January 27). Na de Russen gaat Rutte nu voor de aftapwet. Volkskrant, p. 5.

De Vries, J. (2018, March 5). Wel of geen sleepnet-wet: het zal wel, denkt de kiezer. Volkskrant, p. 14.

De Vries, J. (2018, March 20). Ja, het heeft zin om te stemmen. Al is het maar om een tegensignaal af te geven. Volkskrant. Retrieved from https://www.volkskrant.nl/binnenland/ja- het-heeft-zin-om-te-stemmen-al-is-het-maar-om-een-tegensignaal-af-te-geven~a4582662/

Wagendorp, B. (2017, November 2). Referendum. Volkskrant, p. 2.

Analysed television programmes

Lubach, A. (Host). (2017, October 1). Zondag met Lubach [Television Programme]. Amsterdam: VPRO.

Huys, T. (Host). (2018, January 21). College Tour [Television Programme]. Den Haag: NTR.

Analysed websites

Van der Schans, W. (2018). Laat je niet meeslepen. Amsterdam: Stichting Lokale Onderzoeksjournalistiek. Retrieved from https://wiv-onderdeloep.nl/sites/default/files/2018- 03/Wiv-onderdeloep-laatjenietmeeslepen2018%20wiv.pdf

Sleepwet (n.d.). Sleepwet referendum. Retrieved from https://sleepwet.nl/index.html

Veiligheid en de wiv (2018, March 21). Veiligheid versus privacy: een valse tegenstelling. Retrieved from https://veiligheid-en-de-wiv.nl/

Appendix: the tasks and powers of the services according to Wiv 2002

Tasks In the year 2002, the Dutch intelligence services and security services were merged and the AIVD (the successor of the BVD) and MIVD (the successor of the MID) were founded (WODC, 2018: 6). Both the AIVD and the MIVD have the goal to protect and safeguard the Dutch national security (Wiv 2002, § 2.2, article 6; Wiv 2002, § 2.3, article 7). In order to establish this goal, the services perform a particular set of tasks. The AIVD has five tasks which are mentioned in the ‘Wet Inlichtingen- en Veiligheidsdiensten 2002’ (Wiv 2002, § 2.2, article 6). The first task in this act is conducting investigations into organizations and persons whom give rise to serious suspicion to pose a danger to the democratic legal system or other national interests. The second task also involves the conduct of investigations. However, these investigations are security clearances investigations of persons. Furthermore, the third task is the promotion of measures which protect the interests mentioned in the first task. The task to conduct investigations concerning other countries is represented in the fourth task. At last, the fifth task is setting up threat and risk assessments in order to protect persons. The MIVD has the same tasks, however these tasks are restricted to military affairs (Wiv 2002, § 2.3, article 7). Furthermore, the MIVD also focuses on some additional tasks. A task of the MIVD is conducting investigations concerning other armed forces and factors which may influence the international legal system. Moreover, the service conducts investigations in order to take measures. These measures aim to prevent activities which have the goal to damage the security or preparedness of armed forces, the promotion of the organization of armed forces concerning their concentration and mobilisation, and the undisturbed preparation and deployment of the armed forces in case this is needed to promote and maintain the international legal system.

Powers Most of the tasks of the AIVD and the MIVD are thus focussed on conducting investigations to collect information. The execution of these tasks is connected to general and special powers. The general power of the services is to collect information through civil servants, administrative bodies or persons whom can provide this information (Wiv 2002, § 3.2.1, article 17). Muller (2010) explains that this general power serves the security tasks and the tasks that promote

87 security. On the other hand, the special powers of the services can only be executed in order to serve the investigation tasks, excluding the investigations for security clearances (Wiv 2002, § 3.2.2, article 18). These special powers consist of specific powers which can be carried out by the services when the competent authority gives permission to perform this power (Wiv 2002, § 3.2.2, article 19). Article 20 of the current act authorises the services to conduct surveillance and trace persons or information that is related to objects. The services are allowed to use instruments for observation and registration for this power. Muller (2010) gives the example of binoculars as such an instrument (p. 50). The next article, article 21, authorises the services to deploy persons in order to collect information in a directed way or take and promote measures for protection of the interests of the services. This article also offers the possibility to set up and use legal bodies for operational activities. Another special power is the power to search objects which are closed and carry out searches in enclosed spaces (Wiv 2002, § 3.2.2, article 22). The article further authorises the services to investigate objects to establish the identity of a person. Next to this power, article 23 of the act allows the services to open letters and consignments. Neither the consent of the addressee nor the sender is required to do so. Before the act entered into force in 2002, the services did not have this power. Furthermore, the AIVD and MIVD have the power to enter automated work according to article 24 of the act. This power also includes penetrating security, introduction of technical devices and copying data.

While these powers are all important for the services, the following powers will be the most relevant for this research. The power mentioned in the next article gives the AIVD and the MIVD the authorisation to tap, monitor, record, and receive in a directed way (Wiv 2002, § 3.2.2, article 25). In this way, the services can conduct investigations through the collection (in a directed way) of all forms of telecommunication and transfer of data. Recording and receiving of non-specific data is however solely possible in case of non-cable-bound telecommunication (Wiv 2002, § 3.2.2, articles 26 and 27). Finally, article 28 and 29 of the Wiv 2002 gives the AIVD and MIVD authorisation to go to (networks of) public telecommunication providers with the request to provide certain information.

External supervision Because of these profound tasks and powers, these services need to be supervised. While there are several mechanisms that are able to supervise the services (for instance a judge or parliamentary supervision through commissions), this chapter will concentrate on the supervision mentioned in the current act. According to article 64 of the Wiv 2002, the

88 supervisory committee that focuses on the intelligence and security services (CTIVD) has the main goal to supervise the legitimacy of the implementation of the Wiv 2002. Verhoeven (2010) stresses that the task of CTIVD does not contain the supervision of the expediency and effectivity of the work performed by the services (p. 152). This supervision results in reports with recommendations composed by the CTIVD, which are not binding for the minister. The CTIVD consists of three members and at least two of these members need to possess a law degree (Wiv 2002, § 6.1, article 65). Next to supervision of legitimacy, the CTIVD is also authorised to give self-initiated and requested advise to the ministers and the CTIVD functions as a complaints committee through advising the ministers (Wiv 2002, § 6.1, article 64). Complaints can be filed with the National Ombudsman and each person is entitled to do so, according to article 83 of the ‘Wet Inlichtingen- en Veiligheidsdiensten 2002’.