At a time of rising nationalism worldwide, “national security” has effectively become a catchall category — a legitimate concern expanded to include documents, digital communication and political issues that may not have much to do with national security.

Sometimes it takes a bit of luck — a pair of filing cabinets filled with government documents showing up at a used furniture store in Canberra, for example — just to see what kinds of things end up getting classified. And as we now know from “The Cabinet Files,” a lot of it ends up being about politics, not security.

As Gaven Morris, the news director of the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, put it: “Consistently, we’ve seen overreach where governments seek to suppress information because it is embarrassing, not because there is a genuine security risk.”

But there are actually several other areas of public life in Australia that make journalism more difficult, or that reveal the degree to which this country tolerates a lack of transparency.

A few examples:

• Campaign Finance

Australia’s campaign finance system is riddled with loopholes and delayed disclosures.

At the federal level, it takes more than six months (up to 19 months in fact) for the public to learn how much parties have raised and from whom. Donors are identified only if they have contributed more than 13,500 Australian dollars, or about $10,000, which means individuals and corporations can anonymously make multiple donations without the public knowing. At the same time, Australian politicians are not required to explain what they do with the money.

Compare that to Norway, where 74.4 percent of the money used in political campaigns came from government subsidies, with clear and accessible disclosure about contributions.

• Suppression Orders

Australia’s courts routinely prohibit reporting on certain aspects of criminal cases. While legal scholars maintain that suppression can be valid at times, Australian experts are growing increasingly concerned about its overuse.

Jason Bosland, a law professor at the University of Melbourne, has been at the forefront in researching the issue. He has concluded that the many orders lack legal foundation and go beyond what is necessary or in the public interest.

For example, there is a major case of global interest working its way through the courts now. It’s subject to a suppression order, and I cannot legally tell you about it.

In other cases, courts have ordered that already published journalism be removed from Australian news sites, even though the information in them could be found elsewhere — undermining public trust in both journalism and the justice system.

• Defamation

Without any equivalent to the American First Amendment, freedom of speech in Australia is more negotiable and often subject to litigation.

Suing for defamation is relatively easy in Australia, with presumptions favoring those who sue. Journalists, media organizations — and increasingly anyone who publishes on social media platforms — routinely lose in court or expect to lose and settle. The costs can be high, even prohibitive, stamping out some stories before they are ever written.

“Don’t get the idea that the defamation field is balanced. It is heavily weighted in favor of plaintiffs,” wrote Peter Bartlett and Sam White, two well-known media lawyers, in a recent press freedom report. (Full disclosure: Peter is our lawyer). “The vast majority of cases are settled,” they wrote, “not on the merits of the claim, but on a purely commercial basis. The cost of going to judgments is just too great.”

Now, it may be that there are strong arguments for restricting information and limiting journalism — arguments that I, as a journalist, may have a harder time fully agreeing with.

But regardless of whether you think our tribe is full of sensationalists to be protected against or heroes to be lauded, it’s worth asking: Why are governments increasingly so insecure about letting us all see what they are up to?

As my colleagues Max Fisher and Amanda Taub from the Interpreter recently asked: Is there something wrong with democracy, something that has made its principles and freedoms lose their appeal?

As always, your thoughts are welcome, in our Facebook group and by email: nytaustralia@nytimes.com.

On that happy note, here are some examples of journalism worth fighting for, and smiling at, along with a weekly recommendation that crosses generational lines.

______

Trump vs. Mueller

Robert S. Mueller III, the special counsel overseeing the Russia investigation. Credit Doug Mills/The New York Times

Don’t miss this blockbuster scoop from our Washington team, which opens with an argument in the West Wing — “a confrontation,” they write, that “marks the first time Mr. Trump is known to have tried to fire the special counsel.”

______

A City Without Water

A roadside car-wash operator outside Cape Town was fined the equivalent of about $250 for illegal water use. Credit Joao Silva/The New York Times

Cape Town’s water supply is running dangerously close to empty. Within months, taps in homes and businesses will be turned off. The city’s four million residents will have to line up for water rations at 200 collection points. And the police are not expecting peace and calm.

It almost sounds like science fiction, but it’s really just science: climate change.

______

The Follower Factory

I don’t think I can improve on the subhead for this investigative story: “Everyone wants to be popular online. Some even pay for it. Inside social media’s black market.”

Read it and then Tweet it out so the bots can see it.

______

Bitcoins and Boyfriends

What do love and cryptocurrency share? More than you might think.

This week’s Modern Love column breaks it down: “All along, I thought I was holding something of value because I could see and feel it. But realness and value are products of shared and equal faith, no matter if in things unseen.”

______

Australiana

This week, in addition to all things espionage, we have news, science, sports, Netflix, a new Australia Diary and some serious Margot Robbie coverage.

Bleeding Ears and Road Trip Tears: Let us all remember how we came to know every single word to Australia’s classic tunes. (Australia Diary)

What He Did on His Summer Break: Exposed a Global Security Flaw: Nathan Ruser, an Australian college student, discovered that a fitness app revealed the locations of military sites around the world. (International)

By Looking to Asia, the Australian Open Found Itself: The Australian Open has grown to be the largest annual sporting event in the Southern Hemisphere and is considered the Grand Slam of the Asia Pacific. (Sports)

A Vegan Macadamia Milk With Roots in Australia: Milkadamia comes in four varieties and is made from macadamia nuts grown in Australia. (Food)

Margot Robbie Defends How ‘I, Tonya’ Depicts Domestic Abuse: The Oscar-nominated actress says she was struck by how candid Tonya Harding was, even as a teenager, about the violence she endured at the hands of family members. (Movies)

The Best Movies and TV Shows New to Netflix Australia in February: Every month, Netflix Australia adds a new batch of movies and TV shows to its library. Here are the titles we think are most interesting for February. (Watching)

Review: A New Zealand Novel Full of Taciturn Men and Wooden Dolls (Books)

______

And We Recommend ...

I just finished reading “Wonder,” by R.J. Palacio, about a 10-year-old boy born with several genetic abnormalities who dreams of being “ordinary.”

It’s meant to be a children’s book (I read it after my son finished it), but adults could also benefit from what the book has to teach, about kindness, humor and the awkwardness of family and friendship.

At a time when so much seems so serious, yes, including the top of this newsletter, “Wonder” is a wonderful sigh of emotional accessibility.

Here’s the glowing New York Times review if you don’t want to take my word for it.

Australia | Letter 43