Wednesday, December 04, 2013

Are Journalists More Trustworthy than State Personnel?

Art Silber says no, and he's right. Edward Snowden leaked a ton of documents, but the Guardian says it has published only 1 percent -- and that's all it will publish. Who wins in the end, the people or the national-security state? Silber nails it:
Consider the enormous value of the hugely restricted publication of the Snowden documents to the various States involved. Rusbridger, Greenwald, et al. all trumpet the great triumph represented by the "debate" publication has engendered -- the clamor of public voices demands "reform," so committees will be formed, investigations will be undertaken, and when the dust has settled, life for the States involved will go on almost exactly as before (remember: if the NSA were disbanded today, identical surveillance would continue via other agencies and institutions of power) -- and the States will be able to claim that the public knows the "truth," and their activities now have the full blessing of informed public consent.
Read about it here.

4 comments:

Younes Megrini said...

Depressing.

Russell Hanneken said...

FYI, Glenn Greenwald has responded to similar criticisms here.

Sheldon Richman said...

Thanks, Russell. Greenwald's response makes some worthwhile points, but I still see value in what Silber says. We are being asked to trust the private custodians of papers that belong to the people.

Alfred said...

For sake of democracy I wish they be trustworthy