Whistleblowers and journalistic ideals: Surveillance, Snowden and the meta-coverage of journalism

Abstract

Abstract This article focuses on meta-coverage – what was said about journalism – in the debates evoked by the revelations about mass surveillance of Edward Snowden in 2013. Drawing on close readings of a wide sample of commentaries and other such writings we argue that this discussion of the performance and role of journalism points to key issues in the contemporary journalistic field. This meta-discourse sees journalism as a central arena for the exercise of political power, particularly investigative journalism, and the notion of the whistleblower, revealing a set of different field relations. The debates highlight source protection, which is under increased threat in many countries. Moreover, in the aftermath of the revelations, we also witness a strained relationship between editors and reporters, both in the UK and US press. The article analyses how the Snowden debate ignited the issue of the professional roles between advocacy and objectivity, inherently contradictory within the field, between ideals of defending the marginalized and of ‘mirroring society’. Finally, the article demonstrates how professionals and other public actors are triggered to reflect more on the state of the art of journalism itself.