Symposium Events

Information security is now an established weapon in the fight to keep journalists and their sources safe, but are we in danger of encouraging people to rely on technology that they might not fully understand, thus putting them at greater risk?

If the intention behind violence and persecution towards journalists and whistleblowers is to keep their stories from ever getting out, and send a warning to others who may be considering researching similar areas, how best to protect the ultimate prize of investigative journalism: important stories?

War reporting is changing: reams of data and munitions expertise can now be brought to bear without ever setting foot in a war zone, while the access of officially ‘embedded’ reporters is heavily subscribed, leaving it to freelancers to take the huge risks necessary to get the story out.

The need for stronger protection for whistleblowers is regularly discussed but far less attention is given to addressing the dangers of whistleblowing before the decision to raise concerns has even been made.

The slow, careful art of soliciting a trustworthy source is one of the exciting and overlooked skills in the investigative journalist’s toolkit. But how does it work when the source can only be reached via digital means, or presents only an anonymous identity in the first place?

While the mainstream media withers, investigative practice is thriving, but it’s easy to lose sight of who’s funding it; big tech companies and philanthropic foundations, partisan NGOs and think-tanks.