“Confidentiality means nothing if a third party can reasonably access whom a journalist has been talking to through their phone logs, contacts, lists, e-mails, texts or by working out who else was in a certain location at a certain time.” (22)
In Journalism After Snowden, the text discusses the concept of privacy and lack thereof. The chapter makes a valid argument for journalists to take privacy in terms of technology more seriously, in their own lives and writing on the topic in general.
If you are a law abiding citizen you have nothing to fear, but for journalists the idea of location services and the fact that iphones alone share a plethora of private information without knowledge can be a threat to their sources. This idea that our phones, computers, emails, texts and calls are being monitored is nothing new. This has always been a common trend.
Since this is something that can effect journalists, I would think that they would have a moral responsibility to absorb what Edward Snowden was trying to tell and prove to us. So many forms of communication are only relatively safe and passwords and encryptions can only do so much if we are not utilizing them correctly. Edward Snowden was able to utilize his position as a contracted CIA and NSA employee to raise awareness around the fact that the government does not take privacy seriously. It was beyond easy for him to leak and release NSA documents and I think that speaks volumes to how the United States handles the gravity of privacy and security of information.