Paul McGeough at the Sydney Morning Herald sees governments using the war on terror to restrict press freedom – through anti-terrorism and sedition laws – as dangerous for democracy: http://www.abc.net.au/rn/mediareport/stories/2006/1624270.htm. Further, the recent treatment of ‘whistleblowers’ and higher incidence of violence against journalists are further ammunition for the idea that ‘destroying democracy to protect democracy’ is simply wrong.
Without a doubt there have been some glaring ‘holes’ in proceedings since 9/11, see for example: http://www.abc.net.au/rn/mediareport/stories/2007/1851038.htm
However, is the argument that governments should always act ‘under the light’ as clear cut? Consider the ‘cheating spouse’ analogy. If you see your friend’s partner cheating, would you tell your friend? If you were the unknowing victim in that scenario, would you want to know? Or is it a case of ‘what you don’t know doesn’t hurt you’?
Hmmm, perhaps it’s not as clear after all…
Sunday, March 25, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment