[LINK] RFC: Privacy and the Media

[Roger Clarke]

[This is *on* topic, because it applies to electronic publishing, and 
by 'the general public' / 'the informal media' as well as 'the media']

The Australian Privacy Foundation has published a Policy Statement on 
Privacy and the Media.  See:
http://www.privacy.org.au/Papers/Media-0903.html

Feedback would be appreciated (especially of the constructively 
negative kind, of course).

The APF has *not* adopted what might be called a 'strong privacy' position.

Open information flows are the lifeblood of democracy and freedoms. 
What we're arguing for is much clearer definition of what 'the public 
interest' is that justifies privacy intrusions.

________________________________________________________________________

Background

We've intended doing this for years, but like everything else it 
needed a stimulus.

An opportunity was created by an event run last Tuesday by the 
'Australia's Right To Know' (ARTK) Coalition - which comprises the 
big battalions / press barons: 
http://www.australiasrighttoknow.com.au/

The primary focus was FOI.  And Faulkner stole the show by releasing 
his FOI Amendment Bills at the event.  (I'm a little disappointed 
with them, but others are astonished he got as much as he did through 
Cabinet.  We may have to spend some time holding off attempts to 
further weaken it).

The secondary focus was protection for Whistleblowers and for 
Reporters who publish based on whistleblowers' leaks - 'Shield 
Legislation'.  The Recos in a recent Senate C'tee Report are very 
disappointing.

APF is strongly supportive of these ARTK initiatives, and has said so.

The third and least central focus was privacy, and it's a credit to 
the Coalition that it made space for the topic, and had a balanced 
panel.  Well, any two APF Board members would have been a match for 
the four gravel-voiced media hacks they put up  (:-)}

We'd assumed that the privacy advocates would be bait for the wolves. 
And a few people did feel tempted to descend to 'straw man' arguments 
and minor vitriole.  (The term 'privacy zealots' was used, but just 
once).

In fact, the panel and questions were no worse than 'lively at times' 
(which, considering it was early afternoon, was what it needed to 
be).  And parts of it were constructive and at a sensible 
intellectual level.

There's a chance that we may be able to make genuine progress with 
the proposals in the Policy Statement.


-- 
Roger Clarke                                 http://www.rogerclarke.com/

Xamax Consultancy Pty Ltd      78 Sidaway St, Chapman ACT 2611 AUSTRALIA
                    Tel: +61 2 6288 1472, and 6288 6916
mailto:Roger.Clarke at xamax.com.au                http://www.xamax.com.au/

Visiting Professor in Info Science & Eng  Australian National University
Visiting Professor in the eCommerce Program      University of Hong Kong
Visiting Professor in the Cyberspace Law & Policy Centre      Uni of NSW