© Screenshot
From Watergate to the Panama Papers, investigative journalism that relies on confidential sources and whistleblowers has proven essential to the maintenance of democracies and open societies internationally.
One of the central ethical tenets of professional journalism is “first, protect your sources”. This principle is enshrined in professional codes internationally, while laws have been developed over decades to support this ethical commitment. In the analogue era, such normative and regulatory frameworks enabled journalists to stand up in court – sometimes on pain of jail – and refuse to reveal their sources.
But Digital Age threats like the the ‘trumping effect’ of national security over reach, the ever widening nets woven by mass and targeted surveillance, and attempts by governments to undermine encryption have thrown up a host of new risks for journalists and human rights defenders working with whistleblowers. That’s a development acknowledged by Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative journalist James Risen. “It’s obviously becoming more dangerous today to do good investigative reporting anywhere in the world,” Risen said, speaking at the recent launch of a new action-research project designed to better equip reporters to deal ethically and responsibly with whistleblowers in the post-Snowden era.
Discussing Protecting Journalism Sources in the Digital Age. Left to right: Julie Posetti (RISJ), Veronika Nad (Blueprint for Free Speech) – © Giang Pham.
Time To Reassess The Ethics Of Source Protection In The Digital Age
The emergence of these urgent new threats was mapped in the global study I led for UNESCO, Protecting Journalism Sources in the Digital Age, which was published last World Press Freedom Day. The recommendations from that study included a call for journalists and media organisations to:
Consider providing technical advice and training to sources to ensure secure communications, with the assistance of NGOs and representative organisations.
And civil society organisations were called on to:
Invest in, and partner with, news publishers and academia to research and develop new tools to aid secure digital communication between journalistic actors and their sources.
Fast forward a year, and the NGO Blueprint For Free Speech has been funded by Open Society Foundations to develop a set of best practice principles and guidelines for journalists working with whistleblowers globally. I’m leading the project for Blueprint with Dr Suelette Dreyfus and our project partners include the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism (RISJ), the International Center For Journalists (ICFJ), and the World Editors Forum within the World Association of News Publishers (WAN-IFRA)*.
The plan is to engage journalists and editors globally through a newly launched survey, interviews and roundtable discussions to ensure the collaborative development of a universally useful set of guidelines and principles. These will be published online and in print as “Working With Whistleblowers: A Handbook for Journalists”, later this year.
What Do 21st Century Guidelines For Working With Whistleblowers Look Like?
We launched the Working With Whistleblowers initiative at the International Journalism Festival in Perugia last month with a public consultation and an invitation-only research roundtable discussion involving some of the world’s most high-impact investigative journalists, along with the leaders of organisations that support them.
‘Launching the Working With Whistleblowers project at the International Journalism Festival’. From left to right: Julie Posetti (RISJ), Philip Di Salvo (Universita della Svizzera/EJO), Joseph Cox (Motherboard) – © Ireneo Alessi
Risen, a former New York Times National Security Correspondent who faced jail as he fought to protect his sources from exposure in a long running court case, now leads national security reporting for The Intercept. He launched the Perugia consultation, welcoming the project and its aims. He also highlighted the need to treat whistleblowers with respect and dignity, and the importance of continuing to build digital defence capability among journalists and sources. But he also drew attention to the need for journalists to revert to analogue era basics. “The ability by governments to track reporters and their sources is largely cyber. And so the degree to which you learn to meet sources in person and get off the grid, and actually talk to people face-to-face is going to be key to continuing to help – it’s the first step you have to take to protect your source,” he said.
Challenges raised by other participants in the Perugia consultations – including journalists and editors from The New York Times, The Guardian, El Mundo, Rappler, Le Soir and Pro Publica – ranged from the need to develop scalable encryption skills, to new threats posed by malicious hackers seeking to deliberately pollute large data drops with disinformation, and questions around the sustainability of the ethical commitment to protect sources in the Digital Age.
Working With Whistleblowers research roundtable in Perugia. From left to right: Prof Bruce Shapiro (Dart Center, GIJN), Joyce Barnathan (ICFJ), Rosa Meneses (El Mundo), Joel Konopo (INK), James Risen (The Intercept), Jeff Larson (Pro Publica), Julie Posetti (Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism/Blueprint for Free Speech).
Twenty Draft Principles And Guidelines For Working With Whistleblowers
So far, we have pulled together 20 draft principles and guidelines which we ultimately plan to augment with explanatory notes, case studies and practical resources. But we need the help of a broad range of international journalists, news organisations, industry bodies and relevant experts to distill, refine and adapt them first. So, what do you think? Here they are:
- First, protect your sources
- Recognise the costs of whistleblowing for the whistleblower
- Defend anonymity when it is requested
- Undertake a digital risk assessment on every story involving a confidential source or whistleblower
- Take responsibility for your digital defence and data hygiene
- Embrace and use encryption
- Defend encryption as a human right connected to freedom of expression and access to information
- On sensitive stories, train your whistleblowers in basic digital security with regard to ‘data at rest’
- On sensitive stories, train your whistleblowers in basic digital security with regard to ‘data in transit’
- Publish original documents where possible and safe to do so
- Recognise the importance of data sets as ‘stories’
- Publish the data sets in their entirety where resources permit and it is safe to do so
- Delete data provided by sources, when asked to protect the sources, consistent with ethical, legal and employer obligations
- Delete data that you no longer need, and do it securely
- Ensure any digital drop boxes for sources and whistleblowers offer a good level of security, and, for high-risk materials, anonymity and security
- Verify material focusing on the public interest value of the information, not on your view of the attitudes or opinions of the source or whistleblower
- Actively encourage your organisation to provide proper data security for journalists, sources and stored materials, along with appropriate training for journalists
- For high risk whistleblowers, prompt them to think through how they will cope when the story breaks, ahead of time
- Understand the country, regional and international legal and regulatory frameworks for protecting confidential sources and whistleblowers
- Explain the risks of digital exposure to your sources/whistleblowers in line with your ethical obligations to protect them
What have we missed? What’s problematic? What resources and tools would you like to accompany this handbook? Please make your voice heard and your experience count by completing this survey.
*If you’d like your newsroom or organisation to become a project partner, please email julieposetti at protonmail dot com
You might also be interested in When News Stories are “Too Big and Too Important” to Investigate Alone.
Sign up for the EJO’s regular monthly newsletter or follow us on Twitter.
Working With Whistleblowers In The Digital Age: New Guidelines
May 3, 2018 • Comment, Media and Politics, Recent, Specialist Journalism • by Julie Posetti
© Screenshot
From Watergate to the Panama Papers, investigative journalism that relies on confidential sources and whistleblowers has proven essential to the maintenance of democracies and open societies internationally.
One of the central ethical tenets of professional journalism is “first, protect your sources”. This principle is enshrined in professional codes internationally, while laws have been developed over decades to support this ethical commitment. In the analogue era, such normative and regulatory frameworks enabled journalists to stand up in court – sometimes on pain of jail – and refuse to reveal their sources.
But Digital Age threats like the the ‘trumping effect’ of national security over reach, the ever widening nets woven by mass and targeted surveillance, and attempts by governments to undermine encryption have thrown up a host of new risks for journalists and human rights defenders working with whistleblowers. That’s a development acknowledged by Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative journalist James Risen. “It’s obviously becoming more dangerous today to do good investigative reporting anywhere in the world,” Risen said, speaking at the recent launch of a new action-research project designed to better equip reporters to deal ethically and responsibly with whistleblowers in the post-Snowden era.
Discussing Protecting Journalism Sources in the Digital Age. Left to right: Julie Posetti (RISJ), Veronika Nad (Blueprint for Free Speech) – © Giang Pham.
Time To Reassess The Ethics Of Source Protection In The Digital Age
The emergence of these urgent new threats was mapped in the global study I led for UNESCO, Protecting Journalism Sources in the Digital Age, which was published last World Press Freedom Day. The recommendations from that study included a call for journalists and media organisations to:
Consider providing technical advice and training to sources to ensure secure communications, with the assistance of NGOs and representative organisations.
And civil society organisations were called on to:
Invest in, and partner with, news publishers and academia to research and develop new tools to aid secure digital communication between journalistic actors and their sources.
Fast forward a year, and the NGO Blueprint For Free Speech has been funded by Open Society Foundations to develop a set of best practice principles and guidelines for journalists working with whistleblowers globally. I’m leading the project for Blueprint with Dr Suelette Dreyfus and our project partners include the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism (RISJ), the International Center For Journalists (ICFJ), and the World Editors Forum within the World Association of News Publishers (WAN-IFRA)*.
The plan is to engage journalists and editors globally through a newly launched survey, interviews and roundtable discussions to ensure the collaborative development of a universally useful set of guidelines and principles. These will be published online and in print as “Working With Whistleblowers: A Handbook for Journalists”, later this year.
What Do 21st Century Guidelines For Working With Whistleblowers Look Like?
We launched the Working With Whistleblowers initiative at the International Journalism Festival in Perugia last month with a public consultation and an invitation-only research roundtable discussion involving some of the world’s most high-impact investigative journalists, along with the leaders of organisations that support them.
‘Launching the Working With Whistleblowers project at the International Journalism Festival’. From left to right: Julie Posetti (RISJ), Philip Di Salvo (Universita della Svizzera/EJO), Joseph Cox (Motherboard) – © Ireneo Alessi
Risen, a former New York Times National Security Correspondent who faced jail as he fought to protect his sources from exposure in a long running court case, now leads national security reporting for The Intercept. He launched the Perugia consultation, welcoming the project and its aims. He also highlighted the need to treat whistleblowers with respect and dignity, and the importance of continuing to build digital defence capability among journalists and sources. But he also drew attention to the need for journalists to revert to analogue era basics. “The ability by governments to track reporters and their sources is largely cyber. And so the degree to which you learn to meet sources in person and get off the grid, and actually talk to people face-to-face is going to be key to continuing to help – it’s the first step you have to take to protect your source,” he said.
Challenges raised by other participants in the Perugia consultations – including journalists and editors from The New York Times, The Guardian, El Mundo, Rappler, Le Soir and Pro Publica – ranged from the need to develop scalable encryption skills, to new threats posed by malicious hackers seeking to deliberately pollute large data drops with disinformation, and questions around the sustainability of the ethical commitment to protect sources in the Digital Age.
Working With Whistleblowers research roundtable in Perugia. From left to right: Prof Bruce Shapiro (Dart Center, GIJN), Joyce Barnathan (ICFJ), Rosa Meneses (El Mundo), Joel Konopo (INK), James Risen (The Intercept), Jeff Larson (Pro Publica), Julie Posetti (Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism/Blueprint for Free Speech).
Twenty Draft Principles And Guidelines For Working With Whistleblowers
So far, we have pulled together 20 draft principles and guidelines which we ultimately plan to augment with explanatory notes, case studies and practical resources. But we need the help of a broad range of international journalists, news organisations, industry bodies and relevant experts to distill, refine and adapt them first. So, what do you think? Here they are:
What have we missed? What’s problematic? What resources and tools would you like to accompany this handbook? Please make your voice heard and your experience count by completing this survey.
You might also be interested in When News Stories are “Too Big and Too Important” to Investigate Alone.
Sign up for the EJO’s regular monthly newsletter or follow us on Twitter.
Tags: anonymity, Governmental Surveillance, Internet Surveillance, Investigative Journalism, Journalism, privacy, Security, state surveillance, Whistleblowers, Whistleblowing
About the Author
Julie Posetti
Related Posts
The new tool helping outlets measure the impact...
Audit of British Tory MP demonstrates the power...
From ChatGPT to crime: how journalists are shaping...
INTERVIEW: Using digital solutions to protect the practice...
The new tool helping outlets measure the impact of investigative...
October 22, 2023
Audit of British Tory MP demonstrates the power of investigative...
September 13, 2023
The impact of competing tech regulations in the EU, US...
September 12, 2023
Enough ‘doomer’ news! How ‘solutions journalism’ can turn climate anxiety...
August 31, 2023
Student perspective: How Western media embraced TikTok to reach Gen...
August 19, 2023
Lessons from Spain: Why outlets need to unite to make...
July 26, 2023
INTERVIEW: Self-censorship and untold stories in Uganda
June 23, 2023
Student Perspective: Job insecurity at the root of poor mental...
June 9, 2023
The battle against disinformation and Russian propaganda in Central and...
June 1, 2023
Opinion: Why Poland’s rise on the Press Freedom Index is...
May 17, 2023
From ChatGPT to crime: how journalists are shaping the debate...
April 25, 2023
Student perspective: Supporting the journalists who face hopelessness, trauma and...
April 13, 2023
Interview: Why young people in Bosnia and Herzegovina feel they...
March 29, 2023
Humanitarian reporting: Why coverage of the Turkey and Syria earthquakes...
March 8, 2023
How women journalists in Burkina Faso are making a difference...
January 11, 2023
Dispelling the ‘green’ AI myth: the true environmental cost of...
December 29, 2022
New publication highlights the importance of the Black press in...
December 12, 2022
The enduring press freedom challenge: how Japan’s exclusive press clubs...
September 26, 2022
How Journalism is joining forces with AI to fight online...
September 14, 2022
How cash deals between big tech and Australian news outlets...
September 1, 2022
Panel debate: Should journalists be activists?
August 19, 2022
Review: The dynamics of disinformation in developing countries
August 9, 2022
Interview: Are social media platforms helping or hindering the mandate...
July 15, 2022
Policy brief from UNESCO recommends urgent interventions to protect quality...
July 5, 2022
EJO’s statement on Ukraine
February 28, 2022
Study shows European mainstream media ignore humanitarian crises in the...
May 22, 2024
Journalism students see an industry in crisis. It’s time to...
April 18, 2024
Interview: How a summer school is sowing seeds for strong...
March 14, 2024
AI advances have left news publishers fearing for their business...
February 23, 2024
Big comeback for organisation providing invaluable networks to journalism students
January 31, 2024
The new tool helping outlets measure the impact of investigative...
October 22, 2023
Audit of British Tory MP demonstrates the power of investigative...
September 13, 2023
The impact of competing tech regulations in the EU, US...
September 12, 2023
Enough ‘doomer’ news! How ‘solutions journalism’ can turn climate anxiety...
August 31, 2023
Student perspective: How Western media embraced TikTok to reach Gen...
August 19, 2023
Lessons from Spain: Why outlets need to unite to make...
July 26, 2023
INTERVIEW: Self-censorship and untold stories in Uganda
June 23, 2023
Student Perspective: Job insecurity at the root of poor mental...
June 9, 2023
The battle against disinformation and Russian propaganda in Central and...
June 1, 2023
Opinion: Why Poland’s rise on the Press Freedom Index is...
May 17, 2023
From ChatGPT to crime: how journalists are shaping the debate...
April 25, 2023
Student perspective: Supporting the journalists who face hopelessness, trauma and...
April 13, 2023
Interview: Why young people in Bosnia and Herzegovina feel they...
March 29, 2023
Humanitarian reporting: Why coverage of the Turkey and Syria earthquakes...
March 8, 2023
How women journalists in Burkina Faso are making a difference...
January 11, 2023
Dispelling the ‘green’ AI myth: the true environmental cost of...
December 29, 2022
New publication highlights the importance of the Black press in...
December 12, 2022
The enduring press freedom challenge: how Japan’s exclusive press clubs...
September 26, 2022
How Journalism is joining forces with AI to fight online...
September 14, 2022
How cash deals between big tech and Australian news outlets...
September 1, 2022
Panel debate: Should journalists be activists?
August 19, 2022
Review: The dynamics of disinformation in developing countries
August 9, 2022
Interview: Are social media platforms helping or hindering the mandate...
July 15, 2022
Policy brief from UNESCO recommends urgent interventions to protect quality...
July 5, 2022
EJO’s statement on Ukraine
February 28, 2022
13 Things Newspapers Can Learn From Buzzfeed
April 10, 2015
How Data Journalism Is Taught In Europe
January 19, 2016
Why Journalism Needs Scientists (Now)
May 13, 2017
Digitalisation: Changing The Relationship Between Public Relations And Journalism
August 6, 2015
The Lemon Dealers
June 27, 2007
The new tool helping outlets measure the impact of investigative...
October 22, 2023
Audit of British Tory MP demonstrates the power of investigative...
September 13, 2023
The impact of competing tech regulations in the EU, US...
September 12, 2023
Enough ‘doomer’ news! How ‘solutions journalism’ can turn climate anxiety...
August 31, 2023
Student perspective: How Western media embraced TikTok to reach Gen...
August 19, 2023
Lessons from Spain: Why outlets need to unite to make...
July 26, 2023
INTERVIEW: Self-censorship and untold stories in Uganda
June 23, 2023
Student Perspective: Job insecurity at the root of poor mental...
June 9, 2023
The battle against disinformation and Russian propaganda in Central and...
June 1, 2023
Opinion: Why Poland’s rise on the Press Freedom Index is...
May 17, 2023
From ChatGPT to crime: how journalists are shaping the debate...
April 25, 2023
Student perspective: Supporting the journalists who face hopelessness, trauma and...
April 13, 2023
Interview: Why young people in Bosnia and Herzegovina feel they...
March 29, 2023
Humanitarian reporting: Why coverage of the Turkey and Syria earthquakes...
March 8, 2023
How women journalists in Burkina Faso are making a difference...
January 11, 2023
Dispelling the ‘green’ AI myth: the true environmental cost of...
December 29, 2022
New publication highlights the importance of the Black press in...
December 12, 2022
The enduring press freedom challenge: how Japan’s exclusive press clubs...
September 26, 2022
How Journalism is joining forces with AI to fight online...
September 14, 2022
How cash deals between big tech and Australian news outlets...
September 1, 2022
Panel debate: Should journalists be activists?
August 19, 2022
Review: The dynamics of disinformation in developing countries
August 9, 2022
Interview: Are social media platforms helping or hindering the mandate...
July 15, 2022
Policy brief from UNESCO recommends urgent interventions to protect quality...
July 5, 2022
EJO’s statement on Ukraine
February 28, 2022
Are Journalism’s Best Brains Leaving For PR?
November 13, 2015
Mobile journalism: a catalyst for digital transition
January 9, 2020
Working for Free
March 29, 2010
Do as I Say, not as I Do. Media and...
May 22, 2013
United Kingdom: Coronavirus and the media
March 19, 2020
Operated by
Funded by
Newsletter
Find us on Facebook
Archives
Links