Am I a 'conspiracy nut' for mistrusting pop media coverage of Snowden?

[DrCube]

@aNewLeaf

I’m not sure a warrant is needed. Certainly there’s no expectation of privacy on the Internet, except when specifically required (banks and whatnot).
One could argue that the contents of an email is similar to a phone call, but pretty much anything else you do online is public activity.

What about social networking sites such as Google plus and Facebook that have fairly sophisticated (if difficult to navigate) privacy settings? Certainly there is an expectation of privacy there, right?

If I specifically configure the software so that only certain people will see my statuses and photos, and then the US government sucks that data up wholesale and shows it to anybody with a security clearance, in my opinion that is a violation of my privacy. Those words wouldn’t have been typed at all without an expectation of privacy.

It’s like videotaping the dressing rooms at JC Penny’s. The store may be public, but I expect privacy in the dressing room. The government might have an argument that they can monitor which websites I visit, or read my public comments on a news site or the Straight Dope (although I’d argue the pseudonymous/anonymous nature of my account here implies some expectation of privacy), but private one-to-one correspondence should be off-limits sans warrant. And XKeyScore, among other NSA programs, proves that it is not.

[Smapti]

@DrCube

If I specifically configure the software so that only certain people will see my statuses and photos, and then the US government sucks that data up wholesale and shows it to anybody with a security clearance, in my opinion that is a violation of my privacy. Those words wouldn’t have been typed at all without an expectation of privacy.

I’m pretty sure Facebook’s TOS/privacy policy has stated for a long time that the government can access your pages regardless of privacy settings.

[aNewLeaf]

@DrCube

The government might have an argument that they can monitor which websites I visit, or read my public comments on a news site or the Straight Dope , but private one-to-one correspondence should be off-limits sans warrant. And XKeyScore, among other NSA programs, proves that it is not.

This illustrates the problem the what NSA is doing. Their program was carefully constructed to be legal.
This isn’t a case of somebody accidentally crossing a line- it’s a policy of deliberately crowding the line at all times.

[Gatopescado]

@DrCube

I’m sure the Snowden movie is coming out soon, now that there’s a “happy ending”. Hanks might be too old to play him though.

Justin Timberlake!

[newcomer]

@aNewLeaf

This illustrates the problem the what NSA is doing. Their program was carefully constructed to be legal.
This isn’t a case of somebody accidentally crossing a line- it’s a policy of deliberately crowding the line at all times.

+1

[Martini_Enfield]

@Sam_Lowry

I would think it’s more because of poor journalism. It’s like the quote “Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.”

It seems like there’s been many news stories that play out the same way. Some big story breaks that could raise a lot of important pertinent questions, but instead the media focuses on a few minor things. It could be because they think the public is more interested in the minor things. Or it could be that the big things would be hard to sum up in quick newsbites, unlike the minor things.

Or it could be that time-poor journalists can’t get the information on the big things?

I know it’s a popular image of the behatted or plucky journalist who works on one big thing at a time, but windmills do not work that way.

Now, if the only thing you have to do is follow up Massive Story X, then sure, you’ve got time to work sources, send out questions hither and yon and keep pressuring for more information when an entity is less than forthcoming.

But since most journalists are probably working on literally five things at once, if the responses from multiple sources are “No comment”, “Not at liberty to say”, “We’re not going to answer that”, “seriously, no-one is going to tell you anything, so stop wasting your time and ours”, etc I think you can understand why stories sometimes end up seeming a little less weighty than a Concerned Citizen might like.

[kayaker]

Am I a conspiracy nut for wondering about the encrypted email providers that are shutting down?

“I wish that I could legally share with you the events that led to my decision. I cannot,” Levison wrote. “I feel you deserve to know what’s going on–the first amendment is supposed to guarantee me the freedom to speak out in situations like this.”

[BrokenBriton]

And equally to the point:

“I have been forced to make a difficult decision: to become complicit in crimes against the American people or walk away from nearly ten years of hard work by shutting down Lavabit,”

And the above more fully:

“I feel you deserve to know what’s going on – the first amendment is supposed to guarantee me the freedom to speak out in situations like this,” Levison wrote. “Unfortunately, Congress has passed laws that say otherwise. As things currently stand, I cannot share my experiences over the last six weeks, even though I have twice made the appropriate requests.”

I fear for his tax records and await the coordinated smearing.