[NotSammyHagar]

It shouldn't be amazing but it is endlessly surprising to me that authorities cannot stop abusing their authority to spy on their fellow citizens. The articles doesn't clarify whether this is a case of "shootings are happening right now and we are spying on the reporters for a day or two because there is an urgent need to protect people and maybe their sources will help us", or whether it was "we were irritated that they figured some things out, it was an easy lazy way to try to find out who was giving them info".

Authorities will spy on us when given the opportunity for expediency. With everyone carrying around phone/tracking device, your recent vintage car comes with one and then there are just things like tagging devices, apple tags etc.

What we need are serious penalties for this spying, but ha ha we are going in the opposite direction. I'm not even in the UK, but I figure authorities in the US are doing this kind of thing too. They try to get text messages, all kinds of surveilance is going on.

[perihelions]

- "I figure authorities in the US are doing this kind of thing too"

It's endemic, and coincidentally there was a bill that failed in the US senate just last week that was meant to put to a halt to it—Wyden's "Protect Reporters from Exploitative State Spying Act",

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/5033592-cotton-blocks-fe...

https://www.wired.com/story/press-act-journalism-shield-law-...

[potato3732842]

Every institutions #1 priority is to amass power and perpetuate itself. Of course the violence arm of the state engages in extralegal surveillance and extralegal intelligence gathering and extralegal violence to these ends of course it curries favor with the arms of government it seeks to ally itself with by offering to do so on their behalf on a limited basis.

Speaking about the police specifically, or perhaps more generally the executive branch of the state, the only thing that checks this power is the risk of them doing something that so threatens the populace or other institutions that they ally against them. The point at which this check starts becoming a realistic possibility explains the variance in volume and forms this bad behavior takes from country to country, culture to culture, etc.

[vkou]

> It shouldn't be amazing but it is endlessly surprising to me that authorities cannot stop abusing their authority to spy on their fellow citizens.

The relationship between the UK and Ireland is less like that of fellow citizens and more like that of a colonial occupier.

[vinay427]

This article is about the PSNI, a documentary released in 2017, and surveillance in 2018. While the history between NI, the rest of the UK, and the Republic of Ireland is obviously relevant, it’s a bit of a stretch to reduce this to the relationship between the UK and Ireland.

[potsandpans]

And yet, we as civilians cannot resist just handing that power over to them.

What's the solution? People just don't care about civil liberties, if it means the possibility of preventing every perceivable harm to protected members of society (think of the children).

There is apparently no line.

[sydbarrett74]

Alas, our need for safety is far more primal than our need for freedom.

[cjs_ac]

From the article:

> Birney and McCaffrey were arrested in 2018 over the alleged theft of material used in the documentary from Northern Ireland's police ombudsman and claimed they were subject to covert surveillance before and after the release of the film.

The PSNI overreacted in this case over concerns that information was leaking from the police regulator. Keep in mind that at the time of the documentary's release, the Royal Ulster Constabulary (the PSNI's predecessor organisation) was undertaking a massive decades-long counter-terrorist operation that involved suppressing terrorist organisations on both sides of the conflict, and that many of these terrorist organisations still exist and remain heavily involved in organised crime.

While the PSNI acted illegally in these raids, it's easy to see that their motivation stemmed from a need to investigate any leaks, which, if they had existed, would almost certainly have put lives (informants) at risk.

It's not always some grand conspiracy. At least in the UK, it's usually honest people doing their best and getting it wrong.

[rootedbox]

The Peelers have historically not been known for their honesty when interacting with Catholics. Racism serves as an institutional tool for harassment and the justification of power over certain groups. There is no genuine honesty in these practices, even if they are ostensibly used to prevent violence.

[lawlessone]

>they were arrested over a documentary that alleged police collusion in the 1994 murder of six Catholic soccer fans.

[pessimizer]

> their motivation stemmed from a need to investigate any leaks

It is 100% of the time motivated from a desire to investigate leaks and find sources. If you think this is a justification, you will always be in favor of the surveillance of journalists.

> It's not always some grand conspiracy. At least in the UK, it's usually honest people doing their best and getting it wrong.

If they were honest, they'd admit that they neither believe in journalism, nor the protection of journalists' sources. Some do admit that, but most don't.

[aziaziazi]

Perhaps removing the informant from the field would be a less productive but legal solution to preserve their life?

I don’t think non-secret police has the right to overpass it’s rights even for any good with honest sentiment. How useful is a legal framework that can be trespassed in case of lives at risk, in a violent context where people get murdered?

We should refrain to call conspiracy easily but if I would be caught, "honest people doing their best" is how I’d try to defend myself.