See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/350480442

The Monitored Watchdogs: Journalists’ Surveillance and its Repercussions for

their Professional and Personal Lives in Pakistan

Article  in  Journalism Studies · March 2021

DOI: 10.1080/1461670X.2021.1904272

CITATIONS READS

0 17

1 author:

Sadia Sadia Jamil

Khalifa University
14 PUBLICATIONS   48 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Sadia Sadia Jamil on 05 April 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Journalism Studies

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rjos20

The Monitored Watchdogs: Journalists’

Surveillance and its Repercussions for their
Professional and Personal Lives in Pakistan

Sadia Jamil

To cite this article: Sadia Jamil (2021): The Monitored Watchdogs: Journalists’ Surveillance and
its Repercussions for their Professional and Personal Lives in Pakistan, Journalism Studies, DOI:
10.1080/1461670X.2021.1904272

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2021.1904272

Published online: 29 Mar 2021.

Submit your article to this journal

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rjos20
JOURNALISM STUDIES
https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2021.1904272

The Monitored Watchdogs: Journalists’ Surveillance and its

Repercussions for their Professional and Personal Lives in
Pakistan
Sadia Jamil
Department of Humanities & Social Sciences, Khalifa University of Science & Technology, Abu Dhabi, United
Arab Emirates

ABSTRACT KEYWORDS
Journalists, across the world, are ever more at risk of surveillance Journalists’ work; physical
from state and non-state antagonists. However, to work safely in surveillance; digital
a monitored environment is a substantial challenge for surveillance; Pakistani news
media; panopticism; post-
journalists. In such regimes, journalists and media organizations
panopticism; competitive
are often prone to attacks by the state authorities. Surveillance, authoritarianism
no matter real or implied, the presence of state panopticon
power is felt strongly by the journalists, especially in competitive
authoritarian countries like Pakistan. While international
organizations monitoring media freedom and journalists’
protection do regularly highlight the increasing surveillance of
Pakistani journalists, it is imperative to investigate the way they
experience it in their real lives and its implications for them. Thus,
informed by the theoretical approaches of panopticism, post-
panopticism and competitive authoritarianism, this study aims to
address the journalists’ lived experiences of surveillance and its
impacts on their professional and personal lives in Pakistan. To
accomplish these aims, this study uses the qualitative methods of
document review and in-depth interviews, and offers a thematic
analysis of the gathered data.

Introduction
The practice of journalism has never been more global than it is today. Nevertheless, jour-
nalists are more vulnerable to surveillance than ever before (Mills 2019). Technology has
facilitated the development of sophisticated applications and devices that facilitate jour-
nalists’ surveillance. Unfortunately, the journalists’ inability to know whether they are
being monitored and to what extent their communications are being recorded causes
fear among them (Jamil 2020a; Pen America 2014). Authoritarian governments use
both physical and digital surveillances in order to monitor and intervene journalists’
work, which ultimately affects their watchdog role and more broadly media freedom
(Thorsen 2019). It is important to note that journalists’ surveillance is not just common
in authoritarian regimes. This is now widespread in the Western democracies as well,
turning them into “surveillance societies” (Mills 2019, 691). For example, in the United

CONTACT Sadia Jamil Sadia.jamil@ymail.com

Supplemental data for this article can be accessed at https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2021.1904272
© 2021 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
2 S. JAMIL

States, this is occurring after Edward Snowden’s disclosure about a surveillance pro-
gramme, PRISM, developed by the National Security Agency (NSA). This surveillance pro-
gramme allows NSA to keep a record of journalists’ communication through emails,
telephone and social media; their personal and professional documents stored in
digital devices (such as mobile phone and laptop); and other data repossessed from
global internet companies, including: Google, Apple, Microsoft and Facebook (Gellman
and Poitras 2013; Lyon 2015; Lashmar 2018). The United States’ National Security
Agency (NSA) keeps a record of communication of the American users under the authority
of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance (FISA) Court, a U.S. federal court that issues surveil-
lance warrants for domestic intelligence and law enforcement organizations (Greenwald
2015). This indicates the presence of an institutional system for the practice of surveillance
in the United States. Such institutional mechanisms of carrying out surveillance, in the
form of national security laws, do exist in other Western countries as well, such as Australia
and the United Kingdom (Lowenthal 2015). Thus, it is evident that journalists’ surveillance
is common either in democratic or authoritarian regimes, resulting in their practice of self-
censorship and restrained capacity to perform their watchdog role (Jamil and Muschert
2020; Jamil 2020a).
In competitive authoritarian regimes, like Pakistan, the journalists’ dilemma increases
because of the political milieu within which they operate. Since its independence from
the British-ruled India, Pakistan has been governed by military and democratic govern-
ments. However, democratic governments have not been absolutely democratic given
media freedom and journalistic independence have always been controlled by the
ruling authorities and intelligence agencies (Gul, Obaid, and Ali 2017; The News 2020).
The case of Pakistan is complicated because journalists are not only monitored by the
country’s government and intelligence agencies, but also are also prone to covert and
overt monitoring by local political parties, religious and militant organizations that
often lead to diverse safety risks for them, their families and sources. While international
organizations monitoring media freedom and journalists’ protection do underline surveil-
lance faced by the Pakistani journalists (Zaman 2019), until yet no qualitative study has
been done that reveals the journalists’ real-life experiences of surveillance in the
country. Therefore, informed by the theoretical approaches of panopticism, post-panopti-
cism and competitive authoritarianism, this study aims to explore the journalists’ lived
experiences of surveillance and its impacts on their professional and personal lives in Paki-
stan. To achieve these aims, this study uses the qualitative methods of document review
and in-depth interviews, and offers a thematic analysis of the gathered data.
Hence, this article begins with the reflection upon panopticism, post-panopticism and
competitive authoritarianism as the framework of this study. Then the article reviews
the literature into surveillance and journalism practice and briefly describes the news
media ecology in Pakistan. It goes on articulating the methodology. Finally, it discusses
the findings of this study.

Theoretical Framework: Panopticism, Post-panopticism and the

Journalists’ Surveillance in Competitive Authoritarian Regimes
Panopticism is a theoretical approach that helps to understand the phenomenon of sur-
veillance. The theoretical concept of panopticism was developed by Michel Foucault, who
 JOURNALISM STUDIES 3

conceived its idea from Jeremy Bentham’s “Panopticon”. Bozovic (1995) suggests that the
Panopticon is a specifically designed building, typically circular, with prison cells and a
guard tower is placed in the centre of the courtyard. This allows the guard to monitor
all prisoners without their awareness of being surveilled by them (Mark 2002). Foucault’s
framework of “panopticism” suggests that those under surveillance carry a subservient
role in the already existing power structure (Foucault 1977). He posits that when
people under observation or monitoring are aware of being observed, they are actually
easy to be controlled by those who observe them. This increases the power of the obser-
ver. Foucault’s panopticism has some distinct features, as listed below:

(1) Surveillance is mostly physical, confined to closed physical spaces, and visible;
(2) The main actor of surveillance is the state with its institutions;
(3) The object of surveillance is the underclass where the focus is on individuals and their
physical bodies;
(4) Surveillance aims at discipline;
(5) Surveillance is mostly perceived as negative and sinister although certain positive or
empowering aspects are also recognized (Tilman, Galič, and Koops 2017, 735).

Although panopticism, as a theoretical framework, is pertinent to this study, it is impor-

tant to recognize that contemporary digital technologies have developed and we are
entering into an era of post-panopticism (Galic, Tilman, and Koops 2017). Technological
change is the most significant driving factor in the creation of a post-panoptic society.
Modern surveillance techniques go far beyond the precise spaces, as described by Fou-
cault. Technological advancements, in the form of computers, smart phones and the inter-
net, have also led to the expansion of dataveillance and digital surveillance. Post-
panopticism suggests that surveillance is not restricted by specific place or time. There-
fore, any analysis of surveillance needs to consider both panopticism and post-
panopticism.
Moreover, Foucault’s concept of panopticism represents power relations manifesting
themselves as supervision, control and correction. Surveillance by the state is common
now as a control mechanism for journalists’ activities in the Western liberal democracies.
However, they do have regulatory mechanisms that protect the disclosure of their sources
and confidential information (such as the U.S. Shield laws); and their fundamental rights as
well, such as rights to freedom of expression, access to information, privacy, reputation
and data security (Kirtley 2020). This can be seen as a sort of balance in power relationship
between the state and the media. However, in competitive authoritarian regimes like
Pakistan, the power relationship could be complicated. Competitive authoritarianism
can be described as a hybrid political system and one of the sub-types of non-democra-
cies, which is “characterized by weak enforcement of formal rules” (Levitsky and Way
2010, 79). In order to control competition, incumbents recurrently break up rules of demo-
cratic institutions (Levitsky and Way 2002, 52) and enforce restrictions on both political
organization and political candidates. Markedly, competitive authoritarian regimes lack
institutions that hold power holders accountable and effective regulatory frameworks
that protect journalists (Chaocon 2009).
Considering the scholarly concept of competitive authoritarianism, Pakistan can be
defined as a competitive authoritarian regime where elections are largely an authoritarian
4 S. JAMIL

disguise, the ruling or dominant party wins almost all the seats, democratic norms are
quite often abused, and journalists and media professionals are often attacked being criti-
cal of the government and the state institutions. Journalists face surveillance, which is at
times life threatening to them (Jamil 2020a). The ineffectiveness of institutional mechan-
isms to protect their rights to freedom, privacy and safety create an imbalance of power
relationship between the state and journalists. Therefore, the rationale for using the
theoretical approaches of panopticism, post-panopticism and competitive authoritarian-
ism is to unpack different forms of surveillance experienced by the Pakistani journalists.
This is imperative in order to reflect upon the ways the state exercises its control on jour-
nalists and to understand the power relation between the state and the journalists in a
hybrid political milieu of Pakistan.

Literature Review
Surveillance and Journalism Practice
Many countries of the world, either democratic or non-democratic, now can be recog-
nized as “surveillance societies” in which a “grey zone” melds the state’s and the corpo-
rate’s offline and online surveillance (Mills 2019, 691). “The unwarranted collection of
personal information from people who have not broken the law in the name of national
security and for commercial purposes is a procedure often adopted by totalitarian states”
(Giroux 2015, 108; Mills and Sarakakis 2016). However, now such overt collection of the
public’s personal information is being made in well-established democracies of the
United States, Australia and Europe too. Consequently, journalists now frequently
express concerns about the government’s ability to monitor their activities, dreading a
possible chilling effect on their right to freedom of expression and an increased challenge
to their watchdog role (Lashmar 2018). One of the major implications of journalists’ sur-
veillance is the adaptation of news organizations’ policies that are more favourable
towards the journalists’ practice of self-censorship (Chadwick and Collister 2014).
Conceptually, surveillance can be understood in two ways. McQuail (2010) suggests
that the first form of surveillance is related to the journalists’ watchdog role that
requires them to monitor incidents and individuals to report on news stories of those
incidents and people (Clarke 2014). For example, journalists recurrently follow celebri-
ties, and they do use the clandestine means of audio and video recordings of politicians
and celebrities. The second form of surveillance is carried out by state authorities, who
monitor physical activities, online and offline communications of individuals (McQuail
2010). The data, collected through authoritarian means, can be in any form (e.g.,
audio or video recordings, photographs and so on). The collected information can be
used to convict journalists, to threaten them and to refrain them from any sort of rev-
elations that may cause trouble to state authorities (Wahl-Jorgensen, Bennett, and Cable
2017).
Noticeably, surveillance is not just done by any authority and it can be carried out by
oneself, which surpasses the difference between surveillances and surveilled. Self-surveil-
lance usually occurs when journalists are cautious of their own activities and produced
work after being threatened or pressurized, and that often results in their self-censorship
(Mark 2002). Today’s pervasive surveillance societies have a similarly conforming effect,
 JOURNALISM STUDIES 5

prompting self-censorship (Stoycheff 2016). The chilling environment formed by the

omnipresent surveillance results in the journalists’ confinement into a pressure cage
within which they struggle with fear, anxiety and depression (Eley et al. 2016, 305). Fried-
man (2011) suggests that governments and intelligence agencies, in democratic or non-
democratic regimes, have an interest in exaggerating fears to justify ever more advanced
surveillance mechanisms and security budgets. In Nagy’s words a “paradigm of fear” has
emerged across the globe that describes the fear of surveillance among masses in general
and journalists as well (Nagy 2017, 449). Technology has further fuelled issues for journal-
ists as governments and security agencies are ever more using digital mechanisms of sur-
veillance, such as spy cameras, journalists’ location tracking and monitoring of their digital
communication (Altheide 2013, 233).

News Media Ecology and the Journalists’ Surveillance in Pakistan

Pakistan’s linguistically pluralistic media landscape is vibrant in Southeast Asia (Jamil and
Appiah-Adjei 2020). There is a cross-media ownership and there are six major media
groups in the country: The Dawn Group, the Jang Group, the Express Group, the ARY
Group, Dunya Group and the HUM TV Group (Jamil 2021). While most media organizations
broadcast news in Urdu language, transmissions of a number of television channels are in
ethnic languages, such as Pashtu, Sindhi, Balochi, Punjabi and Seraiki (Jamil 2020c, 5). As
far as the local newspapers’ industry is concerned, it largely operates in Urdu and English
languages (Jamil 2020b). In the past 15 years, the country has witnessed a growth in the
mobile journalism practice, as well as an increased journalists’ use of digital tools in news
production and distribution processes. Consequently, print and broadcast media have
undergone substantial digitalization with a considerable growth of news websites and
online news industry (Jamil and Appiah-Adjei 2019).
In terms of the state-media relationship in Pakistan, it has never been cordial and the
state has remained powerful to exercise measures to control media through: press laws
(such as criminal libel laws, Official Secrecy Act of 1923, Blasphemy laws); takeover of
media outlets (such as Progressive Press Limited); establishment of the government’s
mouth-piece news outlets (such as National Press Trust); the government’s controlling
of news agencies and restrictive allocation of advertising quota to newspapers;
banning of television news channels’ transmission and cancellation of licenses issued
to television news channels; and distribution of awards to journalists that report in
favour of the government (Gul, Obaid, and Ali 2017).
When analysing the journalists’ surveillance in Pakistan, one can clearly see surveillance
as a historical process that substantially relies on covert and overt monitoring by the gov-
ernment, military and intelligence agencies, which results in an environment of fear for
them. The fear and the power of government and intelligence agencies override journal-
istic freedom and their capacity to perform the watchdog role. The introduction of PECA
laws (i.e., Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act 2016) and the Investigation for Fair Trial Act
(2013) have further deepened the journalists’ concerns about their digital surveillance in
Pakistan. PECA law (2016) now provides authority to Pakistan Telecommunication Auth-
ority to monitor and block anything that is considered as objectionable. The Investigation
to Fair Trial Act (2013) empowers state authorities to monitor journalists and citizen of
Pakistan on the pretext of fair trial (Jamil 2020a).
6 S. JAMIL

Regardless of the reason of surveillance, studies have shown that it affects those being
monitored (Brivot and Gendron 2011). The impacts of surveillance on journalists have only
recently appealed scholars’ attention, taking into consideration the disclosures about
mass surveillance and its consequences in the forms of increased safety risks, journalists’
self-censorship and their restrained right to freedom of expression (Stoycheff 2016). To
date, no qualitative study has been carried out that unpacks the Pakistani journalists’
lived experiences of surveillances and its implications for their professional and personal
lives. Hence, this study aims to fill this gap in the literature.

Methodology
Data Collection Methods and Research Questions
This study uses the qualitative methods of document review (i.e., Pakistan’s laws related
to surveillance and international reports within this area) and in-depth interviews in order
to explore two research questions, precisely: (RQ1) what are the journalists’ lived experi-
ences of surveillance in Pakistan? (RQ2) How journalists’ surveillance affects their pro-
fessional and personal lives?

Sampling
Using purposive sampling, the researcher has conducted 50 in-depth interviews (face-to-
face) of working journalists (i.e., 35 male and 15 female journalists) from Pakistan. The
selected male and female journalists are of age ranging between 28 and 69 years; and
from beats including politics, judiciary, national security, business, health, education, enter-
tainment and social affairs. It is important to mention that journalists from diverse beats have
been selected and no specific beat (such as politics and national security) has been prioritized
while selecting them. The reason for selecting journalists from diverse beats is to understand
whether journalists’ area of specialism shapes their experience of surveillance.
All selected journalists, in this study, are full-time employees of Pakistan’s mainstream
Urdu and English language newspapers and television news channels that operate in
Karachi. These news media organizations include 6 English language’s newspapers
(Daily Dawn, Express Tribune, The Nation, The News International, Business Recorder and
Daily Times); 3 Urdu language’s newspapers (Daily Jang, Daily Express and Nawa-e-
Waqt); 11 Urdu language’s television news channels (Geo News, Express News, SAMAA
News, ARY News, AAJ News, Dunya News, Channel 92, Ab Tak News, Dawn News, News
One and Pakistan Television Corporation – PTV News). While the key location of data collec-
tion is Karachi, all interviewed journalists have work experience in more than one city of
Pakistan. The purpose of choosing Karachi as the main location of data collection is that it
is the media hub of the country and journalists from all five ethnicities (i.e., Sindhi, Punjabi,
Balochi, Pashtu and Urdu Speaking) work there.

Interview Process
For this study, the researcher has carried out in-depth interviews between April 2019 and
September 2019. Initially, the researcher had contacted 75 Pakistani journalists through
 JOURNALISM STUDIES 7

emails, phone calls and face-to-face meetings. Finally, the researcher prepared a list of
journalists (i.e., 35 males and 15 females), who were agreed to voluntarily participate in
this study. There were some constraints during the data collection process. Firstly,
many journalists were hesitant to give interview and they were afraid due to the sensitive
nature of the research topic. However, the researcher provided them with a complete
project information sheet that explained to them about: the nature of study (i.e., academic
research), their voluntary participation, and surety for the anonymity of their names and
their organizational affiliations. Secondly, a number of journalists did not give the inter-
view at the first instance and the researcher had to wait for their appointment. Also,
there is a male journalist’s dominance in Pakistan’s news media industry and thus it
was tough to recruit female journalists for participation in this study. Despite all chal-
lenges, the researcher managed to complete 50 interviews by the end of September 2019.
Each journalist, in this study, was interviewed for more than one hour (i.e., almost 70–80
min). All interviewed journalists have been asked interview questions in two key themes. The
interview questions, in the first theme, explore the journalists’ experiences of surveillance in
Pakistan. It includes some key interview questions, namely: how do journalists experience
surveillance? Do they face physical or digital monitoring? And who practises surveillance
on them and how (i.e., overt or covert monitoring)? Many interviewed journalists (i.e., 41
out of 50) were comfortable to respond to these interview questions. However, nine male
journalists from private television news channels were hesitant to respond to the aforemen-
tioned interview questions. Moreover, interview questions in the second theme explore the
impact of journalists’ surveillance on their professional and personal lives. It includes inter-
view questions to investigate: whether surveillance affects the journalists’ work through
increased safety risks, whether it poses threat to their sources, whether it impacts their
right to freedom of expression, whether it restrains them to publish or broadcast facts truth-
fully, whether it inclines them to practise self-censorship and to change their profession, and
how surveillance impacts their personal lives and families. Moreover, all interview questions
have been asked in Urdu (i.e., the journalists’ mother tongue in Pakistan), and then the inter-
views’ transcripts have been transcribed in English and in verbatim.

Research Ethics
All journalists, in this study, have been provided a project information sheet that explains
information about the objectives of this study, research questions, methods of data col-
lection, topics of interview questions, voluntary participation, privacy of journalists and
their respective news organizations’ names, and their access to research findings. With
the purpose of ensuring the privacy and safety of research participants, all interviewed
journalists have been quoted using numbers (ranging between 1 and 50). Furthermore,
all interview data, including audio recordings and transcripts in Urdu and English
languages, have been kept in a locked security safe in the researcher’s home. Identifiable
information, such as journalists’ and their organizations’ names, have been removed
during the transcription process, and all files have been saved using interviewees’
numbers. The transcription of data and analysis has been solely done by the researcher
in order to ensure the confidentiality of the research participants. These measures have
been taken to adhere to the ethical protocols necessary to safeguard the research partici-
pants from any sort of repercussions.
8 S. JAMIL

Data Analysis
This study uses thematic analysis to analyse the gathered data under two key themes that
have arisen inductively from the interview data, namely: (i) the journalists’ lived experi-
ences of surveillance in Pakistan; (ii) the impacts of surveillance on the journalists’ pro-
fessional and personal lives. The thematic analysis, in this study, begins from the listing
of significant statements relevant to each research question and the overall focus of
this study. Secondly, these listed statements have been segmented according to the jour-
nalists’ responses to each research question. While segments (i.e., research-relevant and
meaningful units of transcribed text) can either be a single word or a paragraph, this
study considers the journalists’ responses to each research question (including follow-
up interview questions) as the segments (see also Boyatzis 1998). Thirdly, journalists’
responses have been coded in a manual coding book by the researcher herself solely
to ensure the confidentiality of data. The codes have been created based on the keywords
and short phrases in the journalists’ responses to interview questions. Finally, the
researcher has identified sub-themes that have been emerged inductively from the inter-
views’ coded data.
To present the study’s results explicitly, the thematic analysis of interview data has
been substantiated with the semi-quantification analysis, which means the use of quan-
titative estimations within the journalists’ responses to each research question and in
different sub-themes (see Maxwell 2010). The sub-themes have been classified on the
basis of the prevalence of keywords in the journalists’ responses to each research ques-
tion. The prevalence of sub-themes (i.e., indicated with p), substantiated with quantitative
estimations (See Tables 1 and 2), has been decided on the basis of the number of journal-
ists’ responses in each sub-theme.

Findings and Discussion

Journalists’ Experiences of Surveillance in Pakistan
Journalists’ surveillance is now a common practice across the globe. The purpose of jour-
nalists’ surveillance, either in liberal democracies or authoritarian regimes, is usually to
monitor what they do in their routine and what investigative news stories they are
working on (Mills 2019). In competitive authoritarian regimes, such as Pakistan, the
state agencies have an additional interest in creating fear among journalists. For
example, this study reveals that the Pakistani journalists, regardless of their genders
and specific beats, are monitored physically and digitally by the government and intelli-
gence agencies. They are surveilled by other sources as well including political parties,
religious organizations and militant organizations. According to a senior political reporter
of a private television news channel:
Despite monitoring of our activities physically and digitally, one main reason for the govern-
ment’s surveillance is to build a fearful environment for journalists. It is a controlling mech-
anism in order to restrain journalists from holding the ruling authorities accountable. Then
political parties and religious organizations have their own agendas to monitor journalists.
At times, journalists are monitored by influential industrialists, criminal and mafia groups
(such as land mafia), feudal and tribal lords. Of course, nobody likes to be naked in the
public! (Interviewee number 2)
 JOURNALISM STUDIES 9

Interestingly, this study finds no relation between the journalists’ area of specialism and
their surveillance. For instance, a female journalist from an English newspaper states, “sur-
veillance is not linked with the nature of job, rather it is linked with how much a journalist
is vocal against the government’s policies and actions” (Interviewee number 43). Inter-
viewed female journalists, regardless of their beats, specifically underline about physical
and digital surveillance by the government and the social media surveillance by various
sources (see Table 1, sub-themes 1 and 5). Table 1 explains the journalists’ experiences of
surveillances by various sources in Pakistan.
Journalists’ response, in this study, unpacks that they experience physical covert and
overt monitoring and digital surveillance of their telephonic and online communications.
And this is mostly done by the government, military and intelligence agencies (see Table
1, sub-themes 1 and 2). With regard to this, a senior male journalist of an English news-
paper reveals:
Journalists, across Pakistan, are monitored by the government and intelligence agencies.
However, it is tough for investigative journalists to report on corruption and criminal cases.
Given our online and telephonic communications are constantly monitored, it is risky for
our safety. I have twenty-seven years of journalistic experience to report on the government’s
and national security’s matters. I have worked in Karachi, Peshawar and Balochistan. I have
received death threats several times through anonymous mobile phone numbers. It is impor-
tant to recognize that journalists’ surveillance is risky for their sources too. (Interviewee 7)

This implies that the surveillance of journalists translates itself into broader safety risks to
them. Such threats to physical safety extend beyond surveillance and impinge upon the
security of journalists, as well as upon the safety of their sources (Jamil et al. 2020). “Sur-
veillance is harmful given it not only poses physical and mental risks to us, but it puts our
sources under observation too and that is risky for them”, says a senior political reporter of
a television news channel (Interviewee 2). Foucault’s panopticism (1977) recognizes sur-
veillance as a negative and threatening act, which manifests its harmful implications in
the form of risks to the journalists’ physical and psychological safeties, as well as risks
to the privacy and physical safety of their sources. It is important to recognize that
these implications of surveillance are not just unique to Pakistan. Journalists and their

Table 1. Journalists’ experiences of surveillances by various sources in Pakistan.

Number of interviewed male Number of interviewed female
Sub-themes journalists (n = 35) journalists (n = 15)
Sub-theme 1: (p = 46) 35 out of 35 11 out of 15
Physical (covert and overt) and digital surveillance by
the government
Sub-theme 2: (p = 40) 35 out of 35 5 out of 15
Physical (covert and overt) and digital surveillance by
the military and intelligence agencies
Sub-theme 3: (p = 35) 26 out of 35 9 out of 15
Covert physical surveillance by the local political
parties
Sub-theme 4: (p= 30) 27 out of 35 3 out of 15
Covert and overt physical surveillance by the local
religious organizations and militant groups
Sub-theme 5: (p = 44) 31 out of 35 13 out of 15
Social media surveillance by the government,
military, intelligence agencies and the public
10 S. JAMIL

sources, across different countries, do struggle for their right to privacy (Mills 2019). In
competitive authoritarian contexts, like Pakistan, the consequences of surveillance are
more severe because it increases risks to journalists’ physical safety.
While all journalists may feel concerns over physical and digital surveillance, Lashmar
(2018) suggests that investigative reporters can be affected more by the monitoring of
government and intelligence agencies. Therefore, it is not astonishing if the Pakistani jour-
nalists get prone to the risk of surveillance of government and intelligence agencies while
digging out facts much deeper. Besides, a number of interviewed journalists (see Table 1,
sub-themes 4 and 5) underline that local political parties keep an eye on their physical
activities (i.e., their routine), but mostly in a covert manner. On the contrary, many inter-
viewed journalists highlight that religious and militant organizations monitor their routine
activities secretly or openly or both. With regard to this, Director News of a private tele-
vision news channel states:
In thirty years of my journalistic career, I have experienced monitoring of my routine by the
government’s officials, intelligence agencies, a local political party in Karachi and a religious
sectarian group. I would like to highlight that the government does digital surveillance using
the Prevention for Electronic Crimes Act (PECA), which permits the state authorities to
monitor and record the journalists’ online communications in Pakistan. Also, technology
has evolved surveillance mechanisms in the country. For instance, now we experience
digital surveillance through recording of telephonic and online communications. The use
of hidden surveillance cameras is common too. (Interviewee number 13)

There is a growing trend of digital surveillance under the Prevention of Electronic Crimes
Act (2016) and the Investigation for Fair Trial Act (2013). Concerns have been raised on the
legal provisions of the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (PECA). A report by Digital
Rights Foundation (2018, 3) suggests:
The PECA was drafted in light of the counter-terrorism narrative and the National Action Plan
aiming to eliminate hate speech and propaganda online by terrorists. Its passage has given
even more unchecked power to authorities to regulate online content. Prior to the enactment
of the law, requesting the blocking of a website, would require complainants to go through
an interministerial committee which would then direct the PTA to in turn tell internet service
providers (ISPs) to block the relevant website. With the passage of the PECA, however, the
PTA now has complete authority to directly block whatever it considers to be “objectionable
content”.

In response to the abuse of PECA law by Pakistan’s state authorities, a senior male political
reporter from an Urdu newspaper states:
The current Pakistani government has been using PECA law to monitor the journalists’ activi-
ties ever since it has come into power. Some digital rights groups have contributed positively
by providing research, education and even direct legal help to citizens, but they have not
been able to persuade the government to legislate data protection laws. (Interviewee
number 9)

In the past, the digital sphere was mostly unregulated in Pakistan and therefore, it pro-
vided a relief from the state censorship for online speech. But before journalists and citi-
zens could find sustainable ways to exploit the opportunities of the Internet, PECA law as
a state apparatus—largely driven by a desire to enforce national security, religion and cul-
tural/or moral values—began to regulate speech online. The matter of apprehension is
 JOURNALISM STUDIES 11

that the country’s journalists are not aware of the extent their physical activities are being
observed. Simultaneously, new applications and services can pose risks to the security
and integrity of their digital communications. The inability to know whether and to
what extent communications are being monitored creates fear and uncertainty concern-
ing what the government considers as a lawful surveillance.
Friedman (2011) suggests that governments and political parties struggle to maintain
the environment of fear to rationalize ever more advanced surveillance mechanisms and
security budgets, which is very evident in the case of Pakistan. With the advancements in
technology, governments have gotten more space to use different technologies to
monitor journalists’ routine activities and their communications and to construct fear
among them (Altheide 2013, 233). The Pakistani journalists, interviewed in this study,
highlight their interesting experiences of social media surveillance, indicating a shift in
the pattern of surveillance in the country. According to a senior correspondent of a
local television news channel, “we do experience social media surveillance. Retrieving
of journalists’ data through social media accounts such as Twitter, Facebook and LinkedIn
is very common like other parts of the world” (Interviewee number 24).
Social media surveillance refers to the collection and processing of personal data
pulled from digital communication platforms, often through automated technology
that facilitates the organization and analysis of big amounts of metadata and content.
It is broader in scope as compared to spyware, which intervenes communications by tar-
geting particular specific individuals’ devices. The use of social media surveillance by law
enforcement agencies and the government is also common to monitor the activities of
suspected or even potential criminals in many parts of the world (Tokunaga 2011). In Paki-
stan, this study unpacks that the social media surveillance is occurring in order to monitor
the journalists’ social media activities and regardless of their genders and beats. From the
perspective of competitive authoritarianism, this study clearly manifests that the Pakistani
journalists operate in an environment that is constrained and risky both, despite the exist-
ence of democratic government. While there are certainly many sources and factors of
safety risks to them, this study highlights surveillance as one of the key reasons of risks
to journalists, their sources and families.
Journalists’ feedback suggests that the Pakistani government and military mostly uses
different mechanisms for unlawful surveillance (such as covert and overt physical obser-
vation) and lawful surveillance through PECA law (2016) and the Investigation for Fair Trial
Act (2013). The state authorities, in Pakistan, carry out surveillance on the grounds of
national security and protection of religious, cultural and moral norms. This is not very sur-
prising because journalists and media that operate in competitive authoritarian regimes
(such as Bangladesh) often suffer from the state’s arbitrary actions and surveillance.
Foucault’s panopticism suggests the state and its institutions as the main actors of con-
ducting surveillance. The prime purpose remains to physically control the individuals
under surveillance and to create discipline among them (Foucault 1977). From this per-
spective, surveillance may not be always a negative and harmful act of the state
because it may help to strengthen the practice of normative journalistic principles and
the country’s cultural values among the Pakistani journalists. Nevertheless, this study
manifests surveillance as a negative experience of the interviewed journalists as it
poses risks to their safety. For example, a news producer states, “it is hard to raise
voice against journalists’ surveillance given we may face risks” (Interviewee number 27).
12 S. JAMIL

This means that there are hardly any spaces to challenge surveillance against journalists in
Pakistan.

Impacts of Journalists’ Surveillance on Their Professional and Personal Lives

This study reveals that the implications of journalists’ surveillance are not just limited to
posing risks to their safety, but it actually goes beyond affecting their professional and
personal lives in quite many ways (see also Brivot and Gendron 2011). Table 2 explains
how surveillance impacts professional and personal lives of the Pakistani journalists.
All interviewed journalists, regardless of their beats and genders, highlight restrained
freedom of expression and psychological risks (including fear, pressure, depression and
anxiety) as the two major impacts of surveillance on their professionals lives (see Table 2:
Sub-themes 2 and 6). According to the controller news of a private television news channel:
I have spent 34 years as a political journalist in Pakistan. I have reported on judicial matters as
well. The Pakistani journalists suffer psychological risks of fear, anxiety, stress and depression
due to the constant monitoring of their physical activities. Mostly the government’s officials
and intelligence agencies monitor them. But religious extremist groups and political parties
cannot be exempted from the list of those who monitor us. In recent years, especially after
2013, journalists’ fear has increased due to the surveillance of their digital communications.
(Interviewee number 18)

Table 2. Impacts of surveillance on journalists’ professional and personal lives in Pakistan.

Number of interviewed male Number of interviewed female
Sub-themes journalists (n = 35) journalists (n = 15)
Impacts on journalists’ professional life
Sub-theme 1: (p = 46) 35 out of 35 11 out of 15
Self-censorship
Sub-theme 2: (p = 50) 35 out of 35 15 out of 15
Restrained freedom of expression
Sub-theme 3: (p = 25) 19 out of 35 6 out of 15
Threats to journalists’ sources
Sub-theme 4: (p = 35) 26 out of 35 9 out of 35
Increased pressure for sources’ confidentiality
Sub-theme 5: (p = 25) 19 out of 35 6 out of 15
Physical risks (killing, kidnapping and attack)
Sub-theme 6: (p = 50) 35 out of 35 15 out of 15
Psychological risks (fear, pressure, depression
and anxiety)
Sub-theme 7: (p = 10) 4 out of 35 6 out of 15
Compelled to change profession
Sub-theme 8: (p = 20) 11 out of 35 9 out of 15
Compelled to quit profession
Sub-theme 9: (p = 33) 29 out of 35 4 out of 15
Suffering dilemma of public interest journalism
versus national security
Impacts on journalists’ personal life
Sub-theme 10: (p = 13) 13 out of 35 0 out of 15
Risks to family members
Sub-theme 11: (p = 50) 35 out of 35 15 out of 15
A lack of privacy for digital communication
Sub-theme 12: (p = 17) 17 out of 35 0 out of 15
Restricted movement
Sub-theme 13: (p = 50) 35 out of 35 15 out of 15
A lack of freedom of expression on social media
due to social surveillance
 JOURNALISM STUDIES 13

Many interviewed male and female journalists reveal that they practise self-censorship
due to constant surveillance by various sources, and they do so as a preventive
measure in order to avoid different risks to themselves and their sources (see Table 2:
Sub-themes 1, 3, 4 and 5). Reflecting upon how differently surveillance is affecting journal-
ists’ professional lives in Pakistan, two male interviewees from a private television news
channel and the state-owned television news channel state:
Surveillance affects our professional life in different ways. Journalists’ and their sources are
not physically safe and there is no privacy of communication too … … … Surveillance
poses physical and psychological risks to male journalists more than the female journalists
in Pakistan. However, it does not mean that they are not suffering the consequences of sur-
veillance. (Interviewee number 29)

The Pakistani journalists, who work for private media organizations, experience surveillance
more being vocal about issues. Journalists, working in the state-owned television channel, are
monitored too. But we do not suffer from fear and anxiety like our colleagues working in
private television news channels. The reason is we know our boundaries that are set by
the government. The staff of state-owned television news channel do not surpass the
national interest for the sake of public interest journalism. It is good to be critical about
the government’s performance and its policies, but journalists should not cross the boundary.
(Interviewee number 24)

Pakistan has portrayed itself as a security state for decades primarily due to its recurrent
tensions with the neighbouring country India. The Pakistani army and government have
always strived to control the media and journalists. And the relationship between the
state and the media has always been complicated in the country (Ali and Patman
2019). This complexity has further aggravated due to the bifurcation of journalists
between two key groups. According to a senior political journalist from an English
newspaper:
The Pakistani journalists are clearly divided into two groups. One group, primarily from the
private news media, follows the passion of public interest journalism and it is often criticized
for surpassing the national interest. Another group of journalists believe that investigative
journalism should not be done at the cost of national interest and security. Mostly, journalists
from the state-owned media, belong to the second group. Now, those who pursue investiga-
tive stories, are under constant monitoring of the government and intelligence agencies. Sur-
veillance is risky for both journalists and their sources. In recent years, digital surveillance has
increased and that has resulted in a chilling effect to the journalists’ right to freedom of
expression. (Interviewee number 26)

This study manifests that the Pakistani journalists operate in a surveillance society—an
environment that is characterized by a complex state—media relationship and that is
fearful and risky both for the working journalists and that affect their professional and per-
sonal lives. Russel et al. (2017, 12) point out that the state—media relationship is compli-
cated in the Western societies as well and the capability of independent media has not
only fraught by the surveillance of government and intelligence agencies there, but
also journalism has become a contested space. Interviewed journalists’ response suggests
that journalism can be a challenged space because they are segregated into two groups
in Pakistan: investigative journalists who believe in the public interest journalism, and
those who believe they have a patriotic responsibility not to intrude in their intelligence
agencies’ work. Apprehensively, surveillance just not only impacts the journalists’
14 S. JAMIL

professional lives in Pakistan, but also makes their personal lives challenging. All inter-
viewed journalists, regardless of their genders and beats, suggest that they neither
have privacy of their digital communications, nor can they exercise their right to
freedom of expression. “Journalists’’ digital communications are constantly monitored.
Those, who work in soft beats, are not monitored for their routine work. But they are
not exempted from digital surveillance of their personal communications” says a
female news producer (Interviewee number 48).
Moreover, data gathered from online communications and information collected from
phone calls can now be apprehended, stored, and searched on demand by the monitor-
ing organization (Taekke 2011). In view of this, the notion of privacy in a surveillance
society may no longer exist, or at least the concept of absolute privacy is obsolete now
(Hencke 2011), suggesting that journalists need to adapt themselves to survive in surveil-
lance societies like Pakistan. Nevertheless, the implications of surveillance for the Pakistani
journalists are worst given; their families also suffer from physical risks, as highlighted by a
number of interviewed journalists (see Table 2: Sub-theme 9). For example, a senior news
producer of private television news channels states, “In 2019, I have been under surveil-
lance for several months. I received threats twice for the abduction of my son. I was press-
urized not to invite some leaders from opposition political parties in my current affair talk
show” (Interviewee number 19). These findings are not surprising because the Pakistani
journalists operate in a competitive authoritarian regime—where independent media
exists but the journalists’ freedom is constantly attacked through legal and financial press-
ures, journalists’ kidnapping and killings and atop they are silenced through different sur-
veillance mechanisms.

Conclusion
Surveillance is a stifling issue in the Western and non-Western societies, with an increase
in types of surveillance technologies. It is not only the type of surveillance tools, but also
the “type and scope of persons and spaces” being monitored has steadily increased (Galic,
Tilman, and Koops 2017, 10). This has prompted scholars to contribute surveillance
studies in diverse disciplines. In journalism studies, there is a growing body of literature
in the Western countries that reflects upon the ever expanding forms of surveillance
and its influence on journalistic practice, especially after Snowden’s revelations of mass
surveillance in the US (Clarke 2014; Wahl-Jorgensen, Bennett, and Cable 2017; Mills
2019; Thorsen 2019). How surveillance works, how does it affect journalists’ work, and
how it shapes the power relationship between journalists and those who perform surveil-
lance. These are core questions that require country-specific studies for a better under-
standing of the journalists’ surveillance in diverse political and cultural contexts.
Therefore, based on the Pakistani journalists’ lived experiences, this study contributes
an analysis of how different surveillance mechanisms increase the power of those
doing journalists’ surveillance, and how surveillance affects the lives of journalists in
Pakistan.
Drawing on Foucault’s perspective of panopticism, this study reveals the authoritarian
aspects of state’s panopticon power in Pakistan. Journalists’ feedback suggests that sur-
veillance is practised by the state institutions to control and at times to punish journalists
in the country. The punishment to journalists takes various forms such as arbitrary
 JOURNALISM STUDIES 15

detention, legal actions and life threats to them and their families. While surveillance is
now common in the Western liberal democracies, they do have institutional and regulat-
ory mechanisms that protect journalists’ rights and that somehow create balance in the
state-journalists power relationship. However, this study reveals an absence of effective
institutional and regulatory frameworks for the journalists’ protection in Pakistan. And
thus surveillance affects the professional and personal lives of Pakistani journalists in
many ways. Ironically, they are unable to know whether and to what extent their com-
munications are being monitored or recorded. They do have fear and ambiguity concern-
ing what the Pakistani government and intelligence agencies consider lawful surveillance,
and how their investigative reporting impedes the country’s national interest and secur-
ity. This implies that surveillance is something that the Pakistani journalists have to accept,
especially when Pakistan has also emerged as a post-panopticon society – where surveil-
lance is done far beyond physical spaces and journalists are being monitored across
digital and social media platforms. It is certainly challenging for the Pakistani news
media organizations to operate in such an environment.
Journalists, who work in similar socio-political contexts, may share common experi-
ences of surveillance. The distinct aspect about the Pakistani context is the nature of
surveillance that reflects it as a process that is historically continued, and it is changing
in terms of the scope of those who perform surveillance to exercise power over journal-
ists. It is not only the government and intelligence agencies that carry out physical and
digital surveillance of journalists in Pakistan. But there is an expanding cohort of actors
that operate to yield their power over news media and journalists including local pol-
itical parties, religious organizations, militants and criminal groups, feudal and tribal
lords and influential industrialists. Also, this study does not find any relationship
between the journalists’ area of specialization and their experiences of surveillance.
This provides a good point of investigation to explore whether journalists’ surveillance
is linked with any specific beat in other contexts of the world. Furthermore, this study
suggests that surveillance is a negative and harmful act for the Pakistan journalists. It
does affect the Pakistani journalists in the form of risks to their safety and privacy, as
well as risks to their sources. Surveillance, either by the government or intelligence
agency or any other political or religious entity, motivates the Pakistani journalists to
practise self-censorship.
To conclude, Foucault’s panopticism suggests surveillance as a positive act too in order
to create discipline among surveilled individuals. This means Foucault’s panopticism can
be seen as a “template” or a normative framework that can guide journalists’ actions, and
it can be used as a theoretical framework to analyse ethical issues within journalism
studies (Galic, Tilman, and Koops 2017, 735). Foucault theorizes surveillance as a form
of correction that can help in the modelling and transformation of journalists as per
their professional norms. The positive aspect of Foucault’s panopticism emphasizes the
disciplining power of the state. Therefore, Pakistan’s state authorities can practise surveil-
lance to maintain the societal discipline, as well as to facilitate the journalists’ adaptation
to highest ethical standards and professional values. The matter of concern is surveillance
largely manifests itself as an authoritarian practice performed by the Pakistani state auth-
orities with an ultimate goal of controlling journalists’ activities, indicating the pervasive-
ness of the state’s panopticon power in the country.
16 S. JAMIL

Disclosure Statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

ORCID
Sadia Jamil http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0524-7355

References
Ali, Arshad, and Robert G. Patman. 2019. “The Evolution of the National Security State in Pakistan:
1947–1989.” Democracy and Security 15 (4): 301–327.
Altheide, David L. 2013. “Media Logic, Social Control, and Fear.” Communication Theory 23 (3): 223–
238.
Boyatzis, Richard. 1998. Transforming Qualitative Information: Thematic Analysis and Code
Development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Bozovic, Miran. 1995. Jeremy Bentham: The Panopticon Writings. London: Verso.
Brivot, Marion, and Yves Gendron. 2011. “Beyond Panopticism: On the Ramifications of Surveillance
in a Contemporary Professional Setting.” Accounting, Organizations and Society 36 (3): 135–155.
Chadwick, Andrew, and Simon Collister. 2014. “Boundary-drawing Power and the Renewal of
Professional News Organizations: The Case of the Guardian and the Edward Snowden NSA
Leak.” International Journal of Communication 8: 2240–2441.
Chaocon, Mario. 2009. “A Theory of Competitive Authoritarian Institutions and Democratic
Transition.” https://leitner.yale.edu/sites/default/files/files/resources/papers/mario.pdf.
Clarke, Roger. 2014. “Surveillance by the Australian Media, and its Regulation.” Surveillance and
Society 12 (1): 89–107.
Eley, Geoff, Rebekka Habermas, Eve Rosenhaft, Siegfried Weichlein, Jonathan Wiesen, Jonathan
Zatlin, and Andrew Zimmerman. 2016. “Surveillance in German History.” German History 34 (2):
293–314.
Foucault, Michel. 1977. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. New York: Vintage Books.
Foundation, Digital Rights. 2018. “Content Regulation in Pakistan’s Digital Space: June 2018 Human
Rights Council Report.” https://digitalrightsfoundation.pk/wpcontent/uploads/2017/12/.
Friedman, Benjamin H. 2011. “Managing Fear: The Politics of Homeland Security.” Political Science
Quarterly 126 (1): 77–106.
Galic, Masa, Tjerk Tilman, and Bert Jaap Koops. 2017. “Bentham, Deleuze and Beyond: An Overview
of Surveillance Theories from the Panopticon to Participation.” Philosophy & Technology 30 (1): 9–
37.
Gellman, Barton, and Laura Poitras. 2013. “US, British Intelligence Mining Data from Nine US Internet
Companies in Broad Secret Program.” The Washington Post, June 7. https://www.washingtonpost.
com/investigations/us-intelligence-mining-data-fromnine-us-internet-companies-in-broad-
secret-program/2013/06/06/3a0c0da8-cebf11e2-8845-d970c cb04497_story.html.
Giroux, Henry. 2015. “Selfie Culture in the Age of Corporate and State Surveillance.” Third Text 29 (3):
155–164. doi:10.1080/09528822.2015.1082339
Greenwald, Glenn. 2015. No Place to Hide. London: Penguin Random House.
Gul, Mehnaz, Zia Obaid, and Shahid Ali. 2017. “Liberalization of Media in Pakistan: A Challenge to
Democracy.” The Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences 25 (1): 37–54.
Hencke, David. 2011. “Privacy? It’s a Dangerous Myth.” British Journalism Review 22 (3): 43–48.
Jamil, Sadia. 2020a. “Red Lines of Journalism: Digital Surveillance, Safety Risks and Journalists’ Self-
censorship in Pakistan.” In Journalist Safety and Self-Censorship, edited by I. Fadnes Anna and K.
Roy, 29–46. London: Routledge.
Jamil, Sadia. 2020b. “Ethnic News Media in the Digital Age: The Impact of Technological
Convergence in Reshaping Journalists’ Practices in Pakistan.” Journal of Multicultural Discourses
15 (2): 219–239.
 JOURNALISM STUDIES 17

Jamil, Sadia. 2020c. “Artificial Intelligence and Journalistic Practice: The Crossroads of Obstacles and
Opportunities for the Pakistani Journalists.” Journalism Practice. (published online first on 7th July
2020). doi:10.1080/17512786.2020.1788412
Jamil, Sadia. 2021. “Increasing Accountability Using Data Journalism: Challenges for the Pakistani
Journalists.” Journalism Practice 15 (1): 19–40. doi:10.1080/17512786.2019.1697956
Jamil, Sadia, and Gifty Appiah-Adjei. 2019. “Journalism in the Era of Mobile Technology: The
Changing Pattern of News Production and the Thriving Culture of Fake News in Pakistan and
Ghana.” World of Media. Journal of Russian Media and Journalism Studies 1: 42–64. doi:10.
30547/worldofmedia.3.2019.2
Jamil, Sadia, and Gifty Appiah-Adjei. 2020. “Battling with Infodemic and Disinfodemic: The Quandary
of Journalists to Report on COVID-19 Pandemic in Pakistan.” Media Asia 47 (3–4): 88–109. doi:10.
1080/01296612.2020.1853393
Jamil, Sadia, Baris Coban, Bora Ataman, and Gifty Appiah-Ajei. 2020. The Handbook of Research on
Discrimination, Gender Equality and Safety Risks in Journalism. Pennsylvania: IGI Global.
Jamil, Sadia, and Glenn Muschert. 2020. “Risks to Journalists’ Safety and the Vulnerability of Media
Freedom in the U.S.” In Agenda for Social Justice: Solutions for 2020, edited by Glenn Muschert,
Kristen Budd, Michelle Christian, and Robert Perucci, 135–143. Bristol: Policy Press, (Section V).
Kirtley, Jane. 2020. “Shield Laws”. https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/1241/shield-laws.
Lashmar, Paul. 2018. “Journalistic Freedom and the Surveillance of Journalists Post-Snowden.” In The
Routledge Handbook of Developments in Digital Journalism Studies, edited by S. Eldridge and B.
Franklin, 360–372. Oxford: Taylor and Francis.
Levitsky, Steven, and Lucan A. Way. 2002. “Elections Without Democracy: The Rise of Competitive
Authoritarianism”. https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/levitsky/files/SL_elections.pdf.
Levitsky, Steven, and Lucan A. Way. 2010. Competitive Authoritarianism. New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Lowenthal, Tom. 2015. “Surveillance Forces Journalists to Think and Act Like Spies.” https://cpj.org/
2015/04/attacks-on-the-press-surveillance-forces-journalists-to-thinkact-like-spies.php.
Lyon, David. 2015. Surveillance After Snowden. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Mark, Gary T. 2002. “What’s New About the ‘New Surveillance’? Classifying for Change and
Continuity..” Surveillance & Society 1 (1): 9–29.
Maxwell, Joseph. 2010. “Using Numbers in Qualitative Research.” Qualitative Inquiry 16 (6): 475–482.
McQuail, Denis. 2010. McQuail’s Mass Communication Theory. London: Sage.
Mills, Anthony. 2019. “Now You See Me – Now You Don’t: Journalists’ Experiences with Surveillance.”
Journalism Practice 13 (6): 690–707.
Mills, Anthony, and Katharine Sarakakis. 2016. “Reluctant Activists? The Impact of Legislative and
Structural Attempts of Surveillance on Investigative Journalism”. Big Data and Society, July–
December: 1–11. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/2053951716669381.
Nagy, Veronika. 2017. “How to Silence the Lambs? Constructing Authoritarian Governance in Post-
transitional Hungary.” Surveillance & Society 15 (3/4): 447–455.
The News. 2020. “Freedom of Media: Editorial”. https://www.thenews.com.pk/print/630338-
freedom-of-media.
Pen America. 2014. “Global Chilling: The Effect of Mass Surveillance on International Writers.”
https://pen.org/global-chilling-the-impact-of-mass-surveillanceoninternational-writers/.
Russel, Adrienne, Risto Kunelius, Heikki Heikkila, and Dmitry Yagodin. 2017. Journalism and the NSA
Revelations: Privacy, Security & the Press. London: I.B. Tauris.
Stoycheff, Elisabeth. 2016. “Under Surveillance: Examining Facebook’s Spiral of Silence Effects in the
Wake of NSA Internet Monitoring.” Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly 93 (2): 296–
311. doi:10.1177/1077699016630255
Taekke, Jesper. 2011. “Digital Panopticism and Organizational Power.” Surveillance and Society 8 (4):
441–454.
Thorsen, Einar. 2019. “Surveillance of Journalists/Encryption Issues.” doi:10.1002/9781118841570.
iejs0272
 18 S. JAMIL

Tilman, Tjerk, Maša Galič, and Bert-Jaap Koops. 2017. “Surveillance Theory and its Implications for
Law.” In The Oxford Handbook of the Law and Regulation of Technology, edited by Roger
Brownsword, Eloise Scotford, and Karen Yeung, 731–753. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Tokunaga, Robert. 2011. “Social Networking Site or Social Surveillance Site? Understanding the Use
of Interpersonal Electronic Surveillance in Romantic Relationships.” Computers in Human Behavior
27 (2): 705–713.
Wahl-Jorgensen, Karin, Lucy K. Bennett, and Jonathan Cable. 2017. “Surveillance Normalization and
Critique: News Coverage and Journalists’ Discourses Around the Snowden Revelations.” Digital
Journalism 5 (3): 386–403. doi:10.1080/21670811.2016.1250607
Zaman, Qurratulain. 2019. “Pakistan Needs Innovation to Challenge Censorship and Surveillance”.
https://www.dw.com/en/pakistan-needs-innovation-to-challenge-censorship-and-surveillance/
a-47932149.

View publication stats