How many current journalists have the capacity to analyze digital content for payload? Set up secure communications? Storage?
Greenwald doesn’t; he’s being “managed” by his source.
What does that do to journalistic integrity?
Why Greenwald?
He looked sympathetic? How did Snowden come to prioritize sympathy over info security?
To others, Greenwald might have looked ideal: sympathetic to
an NSA whistleblower, unskilled in info security, and residing in South
America.
Who’s interested in info security in South America?
The answer to that question makes Greenwald look like the ideal delivery system…
It’s
the job of journalists to not believe in the “hero myth,” to be
skeptics and to maintain their objectivity.
Did it become too difficult when the subject
matter made them the story?
Personal privacy and freedom of the press are a no-brainer. From the beginning, the public conversation has been consumed with the completely obvious.
PRISM--we already know what it's bad for.
Is it impermissible to ask what it's good for?
Why?
No comments:
Post a Comment