August 5, 2012
On 30 July Media Watch ran an exhaustive (for TV at least) on privacy issues with coverage of private tragedy involving the Channel 7 coverage of Molly Lord’s death. I posted on the incident here on 25 July 2012.
It is a fascinating story which throws a light on some newsgathering techniques, how the social networking impacts mainstream media and how that media seeks to justify itself. The transcript provides:
Private tragedy vs public interest
I am the mother of the beautiful Molly Lord who was killed on a quad bike last week. I would just like to let everyone know of the pain and harassment we suffered as a result of channel 7…
— Channel Seven News, Facebook page, 21st July, 2012
Welcome to Media Watch, I’m Jonathan Holmes, and no jokey start this week. Our main item concerns something too tragic, and too serious
It was on the Saturday before last Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in General
|
Post a comment »
Yesterday the Attorney General gave a speech to the New South Wales Alternative Dispute Resolution Workshop.
It provides:
Introduction
It’s a pleasure to be with you this morning to discuss the role alternative dispute resolution plays in this Government’s ambitious agenda to improve access to justice.
I know I’m speaking to the truly committed practitioners of and advocates for ADR, when you’re willing to forgo everything a sunny Sydney Saturday morning has to offer, and spend it here instead!
Today I will, of course, speak about alternative dispute resolution – its benefits and the ways in which the Government is supporting this worthy policy area.
But, I will also emphasise how alternative dispute resolution plays an important role helping to alleviate pressure on our courts, and ensure that more Australians can access the justice system – a key priority for a Labor Government.
As such Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in General
|
Post a comment »
July 25, 2012
The perceived need for the visual footage can drive a news crew to do all sorts of things, most of it appallingly distasteful. Like buzzing overhead in a chopper and peering down on Linda Goldspink -Lord while she was at the body of her 13 year old daughter Molly Lord on her farm. The facts as reported reek of intrusions into a deeply private space. Appalling behaviour is a given here but probably an intereference with privacy.
It provides:
Channel Seven has apologised to a mother who lost her teenage daughter in a quad-bike accident almost two weeks ago after her criticism of its news crew was removed from its Facebook page.
Linda Goldspink-Lord wrote of her anger on the Seven News Sydney Facebook page in a post that attracted more than 32,000 “likes” before it was removed.
She alleged the news station filmed her with the body of her 13-year-old daughter Molly Lord from a helicopter above a property at Kembla Grange, near Wollongong on July 11.
“I would just like to let everyone know of the pain and harassment we suffered as a result of channel 7,” she wrote.
“A reporter was on our private property very soon after the accident Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in General
|
Post a comment »
Last Friday the Herald Sun ran a report McDonald’s says hi-tech specs ‘sparked privacy fears’. The article has a bit of the gosh golly geez to it but it does raise a very important issue. People are concerned about visual recording devices in their midst, particularly when not mounted as a CCTV (though I think there is enough concern about them as well. There tends to be one side of the topic reported on those issues).
It provides:
MCDONALD’S workers in Paris who stopped a Canadian professor from wearing computerised eyeglasses feared he could be recording or photographing people in violation of their privacy, the company has said. Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in General
|
Post a comment »
July 23, 2012
In today’s punch Lisa Cairpis has written a fascinating article titled Who’s surveilling the surveillance cops?
It provides:
Last week I was grilled by Derryn Hinch of 3AW Drive fame about my legal complaint against Victoria Police for their retention of footage taken of me at a peaceful protest in 2010. Derryn wanted to know what I was so concerned. “If you’ve done nothing wrong, if you’ve got nothing to hide, then why does it bother you?”, he was basically asking.
Three’s a crowd… At a certain point, this all gets a little over the top
It’s not just about the mere fact that there is footage of me. I’m also concerned about the logic that runs behind the very act of collecting and holding on to the footage. I am worried about the ways in which that footage could be used, or combined with other footage and information collected from other events, if indeed it can be retained.
The Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) last week heard arguments about the retention of footage of me by Victoria Police. The potential intelligence value of that footage was one reason put forward as to why the police cannot destroy the footage or de-identify my image. The Tribunal will make a decision in the coming months about whether the reasons given by the police are consistent with Victoria’s privacy and human rights laws.
This case, however, is just one sliver of a broader surveillance issue that should create concern for privacy and democratic rights.
Last week the government released proposals Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in General
|
Post a comment »
July 22, 2012
Calls for a statutory right to privacy had been made periodically for at least 10 years in one report or another of law reform commissions. Much longer if calls by academics, activists or just those interested in the area are taken into account. The 2008 Australian Law Reform Commission is the latest and loudest call for such a right. Around this time last year it looked like the issue wasn’t just going to be kicked down the road. The Federal Government looked like it was seriously going to both look at and implement some form of a statutory right to privacy. AM reported a new found interest in the issue. It stated:
TONY EASTLEY: At home the Federal Government says the UK phone hacking scandal has prompted it to bring forward consideration of tougher privacy laws in Australia.
The Government says it will soon release a discussion paper on introducing laws to give people the right to sue for serious privacy breaches.
It was one of the recommendations from an extensive report into Australia’s privacy regime released three years ago.
The Government says it’ll help to address growing public concern over the News International scandal. But the Opposition says the two shouldn’t be linked.
Naomi Woodley reports from Canberra.
NAOMI WOODLEY: In 2008 the Australian Law Reform Commission made almost 300 recommendations in an extensive report on Australia’s privacy laws and practice.When the Government began addressing the recommendations it deferred action on the call for a specific right to privacy. But the Justice and Privacy Minister Brendan O’Connor says the News International scandal in the UK has now prompted the Government to bring forward a debate on the issue. It will release a discussion paper shortly.
BRENDAN O’CONNOR: All we’ve done in this instance is bring those matters forward because we think there needs to be now a proper debate about whether we’ve struck the right balance between two very important ideals – the freedom of expression and freedom of the press on one hand and the right for a private life, the right to privacy.
NAOMI WOODLEY: But the Government already has telephone intercept laws in place if phone hacking was going on in Australia and there’s no evidence that it has been. There are laws to deal with it. So isn’t it a bit dangerous to link this to the News of the World scandal in the UK?
BRENDAN O’CONNOR: Well I think it’s created a public expectation Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in General
|
Post a comment »
The Sydney Morning Herald’s article Data trail easy to follow for Big Brother is an early foray into the Attorney General’s data retention discussion paper. It provides:
“If you have something that you don’t want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn’t be doing it in the first place.”
It builds a massive dossier on everyone at millisecond resolution, and creates more work and challenges for law enforcement to catch actual criminals.
Andrew Lewman, Tor’s executive director
Thus spake the world’s First Digital Citizen, Google supremo Eric Schmidt, during an American television interview in 2009.
Unsurprisingly Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in General
|
Post a comment »
The World Today reports on an egregious interference with defence personnel privacy in Defence investigates privacy leak.
It provides:
SHELEY HALL: The Defence Department has launched a formal investigation into the release of personal information about thousands of former service men and women by one of its agencies.
The information of almost 2,500 former personnel was inadvertently attached to an email survey sent to other former members, even though the department’s software initially blocked the email as a security breach.
Defence says it’s treating the matter Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in General
|
Post a comment »
The Economist has recently run a number of fascinating pieces on Data Privacy in the US and Europe. In Out of shape the focus is on ever expanding demand on service providers (and others) for data.
It provides:
SNOOPING, like so many things in life, is going mobile and online. In 2011 Google received 12,271 requests for data Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in General
|
1 Comment »
July 20, 2012
The Canberra Times reports on the ACT Auditor General’s concerns about privacy controls over patient records at the Canberra Hospital. The report is found here.
It provides:
The privacy of hundreds of thousands of patient records at the Canberra Hospital was vulnerable to compromise because of the poor quality of data management in the Emergency Department, according to the Auditor General.
Auditor-General Maxine Cooper told an Assembly Committee this morning that Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in General
|
Post a comment »
