Putting lives in danger? Tinker, tailor, journalist, spy: the use of journalistic cover

Abstract

This is the accepted version of the paper.This version of the publication may differ from the final published version. Paul Lashmar, University of Sussex Permanent AbstractThe Anglo-American intelligence agencies' use of journalists as spies or propagandists and the practice of providing intelligence agents in the field with journalistic cover have been a source of controversy for many decades. This paper examines the extent to which these covert practices have taken place and whether they have put journalists' lives in danger. This paper, drawing on various methodologies, examines a number of cases where the arrest, murder or kidnap of journalists was justified on the grounds that the journalist was a 'spy'. This has been followed through with research using a range of sources that shows there have been many occasions when the distinction between spies and journalists has been opaque. The paper concludes that widespread use of journalistic cover by spies has put lives in danger but the extent is unquantifiable.

From Silence to Primary Definer: The Emergence of an Intelligence Lobby in the Public Sphere

“…(Schlosberg, 2013: 138) There is no reason to assume that officially sanctioned leaks have ceased. The extensive use of journalists and journalistic cover by intelligence agencies in both the UK and US over the last 100 years has also been documented (Lashmar, 2017). The secrecy surrounding the intelligence community propagated suspicions of the existence of a Secret State, a concept where those in power -notably politicians, the intelligence community, civil servants, the police and the military -wield extra-democratic control, often covertly, over society from within, manipulating the public and maintaining control by surveillance and other repressive means.…”

Histrionics of Autism in the Media and the Dangers of False Balance and False Identity on Neurotypical Viewers

“…False balance is a phenomenon in which the media attempts to provide both sides of an argument on a subject (e.g., whether climate change is true or a hoax, whether use of spies as journalists or journalists as spies is right or wrong, whether abortion is right or wrong) (Koehler, 2016). False identity happens when one masquerades or imitates someone else's identity; for example, when a detective takes the identity of a journalist to access certain information (Lashmar, 2017).…”

“…Considering that the public relies on experts for final judgement on controversial issues, they are vulnerable to consumed information, especially now that studies show that in some situations "false balance can exert a distorting influence on public perceptions of expert opinion" (Koehler, 2016, p. 25). Conversely, Lashmar (2017) examined the use of spies as journalists by the Anglo-American intelligence agencies and the harm (arrest, kidnaps, murder) caused to real journalists by these covert practices. Lashmar argued that the use of journalistic cover by spies blurred the borders between spies and journalists and in the process caused unquantifiable hurt to journalism and bona fide journalists.…”

“…It is not easy to differentiate masquerading intelligence officers from real journalists, and in a situation of conflict, a crisis of confidence arises in the communities experiencing conflict when spies cannot be differentiated from real journalists, and because of the conflicting information, mistrust arises and groups hostile to each other were likely to hurt suspected spies that do not embrace beliefs and goals. To overcome a crisis of confidence, Lashmar (2017) argued that journalists must be journalists and not spies and that spies must be spies and not journalist. Based on these examples it is evident that both false balance and false identity affect the relationships of film viewers and nonviewers since media shape people's perceptions, opinions, attitudes, and behaviors based on the represented object.…”

“…Theoretical Framework I adopted a critical realist approach to distinguish the "real" world from the "observable" world and to gather data from the media but also to use my extensive experience as a disabled teacher educator to analyze experienced and observed happenings, while remaining cognizant of the locus of my own subjectivity in the process (Fletcher, 2017;Lashmar, 2017).…”