The recent and rapid development of the consumer networked devices – Internet of Things (IoT) – market has led to the lawful collection of massive, diverse amounts of data. In asking the research question: “To what extent do existing laws and regulations in Taiwan, Australia, the UK and the US facilitate risk from the IoT to the media?”, this paper compares and contrasts significant laws, their relevance to the IoT, and their impact on journalists’ work and wellbeing in four democracies. Based on 63 interviews with journalists and relevant experts, this paper uses these case studies to provide a snapshot of domestic government overreach and inadequacy via legal means, which indicates a long-term issue of state agencies creating and abusing mechanisms in legislation to access data that could include information on journalists and their sources. This paper contributes to journalism studies and to the practice of journalism itself by exploring the legislative context that shapes press freedom in environments of continuous IoT surveillance and Big Data collation. The comparative analysis presented in this paper highlights the broader implications for democracy of legislation that either capitalises on or ignores the impact of IoT risks to journalistic work and source confidentiality.