5 ms·

I would probably care more had the Aussie media not spent the last decade telling us that government backdoors, spying, censorship etc were good things. The Aus

by LIV2 7y ago

I would probably care more had the Aussie media not spent the last decade telling us that government backdoors, spying, censorship etc were good things. The Aussie media are boot lickers and only mad now that the government is going to treat them like they treat everyone else

robkop 7y ago
I can understand the frustration with the Australian media (by all right they brought this on themselves) but that doesn't make this a topic that requires any less care because of it. These are fundamental liberties for a functioning democracy and they are finally facing some pushback in the general media. IMO this should be embraced and supported by anyone who's been watching this unfold for the last two decades. This is probably the best chance of public opinion swaying to favour civil liberties and I can't imagine it's worth blowing because of what the media has previously done.
- LIV2 7y ago
  I'd be happy to support them if they were campaigning for all Australians to have the same rights to freedom from government spying etc but they're not. Making journalists a protected class is not the answer, it just means they'll continue to push the agenda down our throats.
  - TheSpiceIsLife 7y ago
    How does this approach help?
    - LIV2 7y ago
      If they get their special treatment they will stop talking about it. If they don't get what they want they'll keep bringing it up and it'll hopefully become an election issue leading to freedoms for everyone
    - roenxi 7y ago
      If the media can be made to understand they will get more support if they campaign for broader protections then maybe everyone can be better off. I don't support making journalists a protected class. That is just going to open the door to more abuse and make it harder to push back on the fundamental problems with the prevailing thought - people should be generally free to tell the truth about what is happening, without harassment by government. If the media wants something different, I don't want what they want and hopefully they don't get it. This isn't an issue where people should compromise away the core principles.
  - freeopinion 7y ago
    This reminds me of some not-well-formed thoughts that have been bouncing around the back of my head for a while. They start out something like this: Police should not be a special class in society. They should not have any right not accorded to the general population. Exploring that leads to thoughts like, "I can't just walk into my neighbor's house without their permission. Neither should police." and "I can't shoot somebody and walk away without consequence because of some emblem on my shirt. Neither should police." "If any action would lead to a particular consequence for regular people, it should lead to the same consequence for police." What's the consequence of systematically recording video of people walking down the street? Should it matter if it's done by a homeowner, a school administrator, or a police officer? Pondering further, I come up with, "Police should be able to enter my house with a properly-served warrant. Should the general populace be able to do the same?" or "Police should be able to shoot suspects holding hostages in a blundered bank robbery. Where is that line for regular citizens? We really don't want that, do we?" Imagine if, for example, somebody were to embed themselves in a clock tower at a university and start shooting away. Campus security doesn't have any way to intervene. There is no SWAT team in the region. What if your friendly neighborhood deer-hunter takes it upon themselves to decide who the culprit is and use their own scoped rifle to return fire? Do they have the same legal protections as a police officer doing the same? In the context of this thread: Diplomats can send encrypted communications. All people should have the same right. Journalists, by virtue of being people, should have that right. They have the right because they are people, not because they are journalists. Same for any other privilege.
    - hndamien 7y ago
      Police have specific training and qualification requirements. Journalists don't. There is no difference of any serious consequence between a journalist and a blogger.
TheSpiceIsLife 7y ago
And by this time tomorrow they will have found something else to get mad about.
sbhn 7y ago
You are right they are angry. The australian media as a whole should redact itself. and not just the papers. The media treats it’s pilgrims with contempt when it enthusiastically ensures the amplification and reliable delivery of the governments perpetual message that the you are under attack.

by LIV2 7y ago

robkop 7y ago

I can understand the frustration with the Australian media (by all right they brought this on themselves) but that doesn't make this a topic that requires any less care because of it. These are fundamental liberties for a functioning democracy and they are finally facing some pushback in the general media. IMO this should be embraced and supported by anyone who's been watching this unfold for the last two decades. This is probably the best chance of public opinion swaying to favour civil liberties and I can't imagine it's worth blowing because of what the media has previously done.

LIV2 7y ago
I'd be happy to support them if they were campaigning for all Australians to have the same rights to freedom from government spying etc but they're not. Making journalists a protected class is not the answer, it just means they'll continue to push the agenda down our throats.
- TheSpiceIsLife 7y ago
  How does this approach help?
  - LIV2 7y ago
    If they get their special treatment they will stop talking about it. If they don't get what they want they'll keep bringing it up and it'll hopefully become an election issue leading to freedoms for everyone
  - roenxi 7y ago
    If the media can be made to understand they will get more support if they campaign for broader protections then maybe everyone can be better off. I don't support making journalists a protected class. That is just going to open the door to more abuse and make it harder to push back on the fundamental problems with the prevailing thought - people should be generally free to tell the truth about what is happening, without harassment by government. If the media wants something different, I don't want what they want and hopefully they don't get it. This isn't an issue where people should compromise away the core principles.
- freeopinion 7y ago
  This reminds me of some not-well-formed thoughts that have been bouncing around the back of my head for a while. They start out something like this: Police should not be a special class in society. They should not have any right not accorded to the general population. Exploring that leads to thoughts like, "I can't just walk into my neighbor's house without their permission. Neither should police." and "I can't shoot somebody and walk away without consequence because of some emblem on my shirt. Neither should police." "If any action would lead to a particular consequence for regular people, it should lead to the same consequence for police." What's the consequence of systematically recording video of people walking down the street? Should it matter if it's done by a homeowner, a school administrator, or a police officer? Pondering further, I come up with, "Police should be able to enter my house with a properly-served warrant. Should the general populace be able to do the same?" or "Police should be able to shoot suspects holding hostages in a blundered bank robbery. Where is that line for regular citizens? We really don't want that, do we?" Imagine if, for example, somebody were to embed themselves in a clock tower at a university and start shooting away. Campus security doesn't have any way to intervene. There is no SWAT team in the region. What if your friendly neighborhood deer-hunter takes it upon themselves to decide who the culprit is and use their own scoped rifle to return fire? Do they have the same legal protections as a police officer doing the same? In the context of this thread: Diplomats can send encrypted communications. All people should have the same right. Journalists, by virtue of being people, should have that right. They have the right because they are people, not because they are journalists. Same for any other privilege.
  - hndamien 7y ago
    Police have specific training and qualification requirements. Journalists don't. There is no difference of any serious consequence between a journalist and a blogger.

TheSpiceIsLife 7y ago

And by this time tomorrow they will have found something else to get mad about.

sbhn 7y ago

You are right they are angry. The australian media as a whole should redact itself. and not just the papers. The media treats it’s pilgrims with contempt when it enthusiastically ensures the amplification and reliable delivery of the governments perpetual message that the you are under attack.