On the 1st of October, a large TV show called Zondag met Lubach dedicated 13 minutes of airtime to the so called ‘Sleepnetwet’, which roughly translates to ‘trawl law’. The focus of the epsiode is to let people sign up on sleepwet.nl, because there are 300.000 people needed to organize a referendum in The Netherlands. But what is this ‘Sleepnetwet’?
The Dutch parliament has approved an update on the law that lets the secret services collect data (Van Rossem, 2017). This update allows the secret services to use a digital trawl. When, for instance, a suspect is located this law allows the government to collect all the data in the street. Even the data of the innocent civilians. This law would mean that innocent civilians have a higher risk of being eavesdropped by the government (Sitanala, 2017).
When even a big organization like Amnesty International is supporting the referendum about the ‘Sleepnetwet’, you begin wondering how serious this matter is. In the TV show episode of Zondag met Lubach the host mentions the fact that this law would make it easier to track down terrorists. No citizen would be against the decreased chance of a terrorist attack. The downside that is mentioned states that already in the United States the President Trump is tracking down people that have liked an anti-Trump Facebook page. Whenever the data of the ‘Sleepnetwet’ gets in the hands of a Trump-like government that would impose huge risks for the Dutch citizens.
On the 28th of September, there were 100.000 signatures collected (Het Parool, 2017). On the 16th of October, all the 300.000 need to be collected to be able to set up a referendum. If you are a Dutch citizen and never heard about this new law, it is time to get yourself informed.
Het Parool (2017) Nog 200.000 handtekeningen nodig voor referendum sleepwet. Consulted on October 2nd via https://www.parool.nl/amsterdam/nog-200-000-handtekeningen-nodig-voor-referendum-sleepwet~a4518940/
Sitanala, S. (2017) Vijf vragen over de nieuwe sleepwet. Consulted on October 2nd https://www.metronieuws.nl/nieuws/binnenland/2017/10/vijf-vragen-over-de-nieuwe-sleepwet
Van Rossem (2017) Privacy Barometer: ‘De sleepwet is niet effectief, intimiderend en onrechtmatig’. Consulted on October 2nd https://www.geenstijl.nl/5138591/teken-dan/
Always an interesting topic to talk about, terrorism vs privacy. In this case, we both watched a TV show which tries to create as much noise as possible. The problem with these kinds of late night shows is that although in a fun way, they bring news extremely biased. People don’t take it too seriously but the discussion these kind of shows still create is very big. As they only reflect on one side of the story mostly, these are also the discussion points that are brought up the most. This, in a way, influences the opinions of many people.
To zoom in on this blog, it becomes clear that it also only sheds light on the ‘anti-sleepnet’ part of the discussion. The blog does say ‘no citizen would be against the decreased chance of a terrorist attack’, however directly after, the tv show makes a connection with a total different example, in another state, with an highly critised president. This kind of news creating goes directly against a healthy discussion on this subject. The TV show directly undermines the professionalism of the investigative authorities in the Netherlands and even the Minister by saying that there must be bad control on investigative measures.
Last thing I want to shed some light on shortly is the use of media for rallies such as a referendum. We live in a democratic state where we chose knowledgable people to research these kinds of issues for us. Media reaches more people every day on multiple different channels. If people really wanted to start things like a referendum it should come from themselves, not from media campaigns.
Always an interesting topic to talk about, terrorism vs privacy. In this case, we both watched a TV show which tries to create as much noise as possible. The problem with these kinds of late night shows is that although in a fun way, they bring news extremely biased. People don’t take it too seriously but the discussion these kind of shows still create is very big. As they only reflect on one side of the story mostly, these are also the discussion points that are brought up the most. This, in a way, influences the opinions of many people.
To zoom in on this blog, it becomes clear that it also only sheds light on the ‘anti-sleepnet’ part of the discussion. The blog does say ‘no citizen would be against the decreased chance of a terrorist attack’, however directly after, the tv show makes a connection with a total different example, in another state, with an highly critised president. This kind of news creating goes directly against a healthy discussion on this subject. The TV show directly undermines the professionalism of the investigative authorities in the Netherlands and even the Minister by saying that there must be bad control on investigative measures.
Last thing I want to shed some light on shortly is the use of media for rallies such as a referendum. We live in a democratic state where we chose knowledgable people to research these kinds of issues for us. Media reaches more people every day on multiple different channels. If people really wanted to start things like a referendum it should come from themselves, not from media campaigns.