www.ssoar.info Metadata laws, journalism and resistance in Australia Brevini, Benedetta Veröffentlichungsversion / Published Version Zeitschriftenartikel / journal article Empfohlene Zitierung / Suggested Citation: Brevini, B. (2017). Metadata laws, journalism and resistance in Australia. Media and Communication, 5(1), 76-83. https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v5i1.810 Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Dieser Text wird unter einer CC BY Lizenz (Namensnennung) zur This document is made available under a CC BY Licence Verfügung gestellt. Nähere Auskünfte zu den CC-Lizenzen finden (Attribution). For more Information see: Sie hier: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.de Media and Communication (ISSN: 2183–2439) 2017, Volume 5, Issue 1, Pages 76–83 DOI: 10.17645/mac.v5i1.810 Article Metadata Laws, Journalism and Resistance in Australia Benedetta Brevini Department of Media and Communication, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia; E-Mail: [email protected] Submitted: 31 October 2016 | Accepted: 2 March 2017 | Published: 22 March 2017 Abstract The intelligence leaks from Edward Snowden in 2013 unveiled the sophistication and extent of data collection by the United States’ National Security Agency and major global digital firms prompting domestic and international debates about the balance between security and privacy, openness and enclosure, accountability and secrecy. It is difficult not to see a clear connection with the Snowden leaks in the sharp acceleration of new national security legislations in Australia, a long term member of the Five Eyes Alliance. In October 2015, the Australian federal government passed controversial laws that re- quire telecommunications companies to retain the metadata of their customers for a period of two years. The new acts pose serious threats for the profession of journalism as they enable government agencies to easily identify and pursue journalists’ sources. Bulk data collections of this type of information deter future whistleblowers from approaching jour- nalists, making the performance of the latter’s democratic role a challenge. After situating this debate within the scholarly literature at the intersection between surveillance studies and communication studies, this article discusses the political context in which journalists are operating and working in Australia; assesses how metadata laws have affected journalism practices and addresses the possibility for resistance. Keywords digital resistance; journalists; metadata; surveillance Issue This article is part of the issue “Post-Snowden Internet Policy”, edited by Julia Pohle (WZB Berlin Social Science Center, Germany) and Leo Van Audenhove (Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Belgium). © 2017 by the author; licensee Cogitatio (Lisbon, Portugal). This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribu- tion 4.0 International License (CC BY). 1. Introduction munication studies, this article discusses the political con- text in which journalists are operating and working in Aus- The intelligence leaks from Edward Snowden in 2013 un- tralia; assesses how metadata laws have affected journal- veiled the sophistication and extent of data collection by ism practices and addresses the violation of privacy for the US’s National Security Agency and major global digi- journalists and the emergence of a resistance. tal firms prompting domestic and international debates about the balance between security and privacy, open- 2. From Surveillance Society to Resistance ness and enclosure, accountability and secrecy (Brevini, 2017). While many authors (Andrejevic, 2002, 2013; Lyon, Surveillance has been defined as the “collection and anal- 2014; Van Dijck, 2014) have warned about massive data ysis of information about populations in order to govern collection by governments and businesses as a challenge their activities” (Ericson & Haggerty, 2006, p. 3) so the to civil rights, there a need to encourage further public literature coming from surveillance studies becomes of discussion around the world on the chilling effect that great relevance in investigating the impact of metadata these data retention frameworks can have on freedom laws on journalism practices. of the press, on journalists and on their ability to exert Yet, because of the unprecedented development of their traditional watchdog function (Lashmar, 2016). Af- information and communication technologies, surveil- ter situating this debate within the scholarly literature at lance scholars have rightly pointed at the new ubiqui- the intersection between surveillance studies and com- tousness and embeddedness of surveillance in every as- Media and Communication, 2017, Volume 5, Issue 1, Pages 76–83 76 pects of life in current networked societies (Lyon, Hag- As recent, high-profile international events demon- gerty, & Ball, 2012), going much beyond traditional and strate, in the wrong hands, classified or sensitive in- centralised institutional settings. formation is capable of global dissemination at the As a consequence of the accelerated development click of a button. Unauthorised disclosures on the of a communication technologies, Mann and Ferenbok scale now possible in the online environment can (2013) have also explored the possibility for “sousveil- have devastating consequences for a country’s in- lance” (Mann & Ferenbok, 2013, p. 19), surveillance ternational relationships and intelligence capabilities. from the bottom up, where the surveilled is empowered (Brandis, 2014) through technology to fight back and enact change from below through mutual watching and monitoring. The newly created metadata laws cannot be properly While digital surveillance practices have now been understood without considering the overall context of amply studied within surveillance studies, there is still increased tightening of national security laws and in- great scope for development in the field of communi- vestments in cybersecurity. In light of this, the Aus- cation studies. In this article, I propose to investigate tralian government announced in its 2015 budget that whether we can detect a space for resistance for jour- it will provide: nalists working within new metadata frameworks. This space is conceptualised as “field of struggles” (Bordieu, $450 million to strengthen Australia’s intelligence ca- 1983)—a bourdieusian concept—that is helpful in inves- pabilities, including updating information technology tigating this space for agency. systems and to counter extremist messaging. This in- In the launch edition of a new journal Big Data and cludes $131 million to help the telecommunications Society, Couldry and Powell (2014) developed the argu- sector upgrade its systems to retain metadata for two ment that a question of agency is paramount to our un- years. (Australian Government, 2015a) derstanding of big data, thus opening up a new research agenda for investigating not only dominant forms of data As I will discuss later, the newly established framework power, but also alternative forms of datafication emerg- is clearly at odds with a more recent tendency that is ing from civil society groups, community organisations, emerging in courts throughout Europe and the US and journalists .This study takes up this challenge by focusing backed by international human rights mandates, where specifically on the field of struggle (Bordieu, 1983) where a clearly hostile attitude towards disproportionate digital journalists operate. surveillance is being displayed (see for example, Cannat- aci, 2016; Kaye, 2015). 2.1. The Australian Context 3. Data Retention in Australia Since the attacks of September 2001, there has been a steady increase in number of national security laws The revised Telecommunications (Interception and Ac- in Australia. Over fifty laws were passed to create new cess, TIA) Act, passed in 2015, sought to specify “the criminal offences, new detention, extended investigative types of data the telecommunications industry should re- powers for security and police officers, new tools to con- tain for law enforcement and national security purposes trol people’s movements and activities without criminal or how long that information should be held”. Rapid, on- convictions (Ananian-Welsh & Williams, 2014). There is going changes occurring in the telecommunications envi- also a worrying tendency to limit courts’ powers to re- ronment have, apparently, “undermined” any systematic view the legality of government action especially on mat- access to the tools and data that may be available (The ters of national security. At the same time, there is a Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia, 2015a, clear trend towards an intensification of government se- p. 2). Recognising the variations that exist in the hold- crecy and an extension of its own powers to limit the pub- ing and maintenance of types of data in the telecommu- lic’s rights of access to information, thus making court nications industry, the TIA Act demands the “standard- reviews in these areas even more crucial (Human Rights isation” of such records for governmental use (The Par- Law Centre [HRLC], 2016). liament of the Commonwealth of Australia, 2015a). It is In this context, the Snowden leaks (Brevini, 2017) and claimed that previous inconsistencies have impeded gov- their challenges to state secrets can explain the haste ernmental efforts to “investigate and to prosecute seri- that has characterised discussion and implementation ous offences” (The Parliament of the