You are trying to imply that Tufekci is part of a tacit conspiracy to suppress the real news about... something? I'm not sure. 1) There's nothing in what she w

You are trying to imply that Tufekci is part of a tacit conspiracy to suppress the real news about... something? I'm not sure. 1) There's nothing in what she wrote to suggest that she's minimizing the dangers posed by telcos and goverment. 2) She just wrote a whole book about resisting the government using the internet. (https://www.amazon.com/Twitter-Tear-Gas-Fragility-Networked/dp/0300215126 https://www.amazon.com/Twitter-Tear-Gas-Fragility-Networked/...). She has a long history of documenting the ways governments and telcos meddle with popular action, in real time, too. (e.g. https://twitter.com/zeynep/status/449896348142555138 https://twitter.com/zeynep/status/449896348142555138 , which I just found by Googling "zeynep telco"). I'll restate what the article actually said, since some people seem to have missed it. She writes that Wikileaks characterized Signal and WhatsApp as being useless for secure communication; that this is not the case; and that the media reported this uncritically. Rather than raise questions about Tufekci, I think it's more important to ask why Wikileaks is now trying to spread FUD about some of the best tools that we have.