4 ms·
> a European Union proposal to fight child sexual abuse material (CSAM) — a bill seen by privacy activists as breaking encryption and leading to mass surveillan
by like_any_other 1y ago
> a European Union proposal to fight child sexual abuse material (CSAM) — a bill seen by privacy activists as breaking encryption and leading to mass surveillance
Why not call it: "a proposal to break encryption and enact mass surveillance, claimed to be used to fight CSAM"?
How did the author decide which part to present as plain fact, and which as mere activist opinion? The choice isn't arbitrary - the proposal definitely will break encryption and enact mass surveillance - that's what the text of the proposal directly commands governments to do!
I guess such subtleties fade compared to the two bald lies in the title alone - it is not "spam" to simplify EU citizens contacting their representatives, and since that "spam" was sent by those citizens themselves, it is not a "one-man" campaign either, but a mass movement.
- nickslaughter02 1y ago> Why not call it: "a proposal to break encryption and enact mass surveillance, claimed to be used to fight CSAM"? That doesn't have the same ring to it to persuade clueless and weak politicians to support anything with the word "child" in it.
- JoshTriplett 1y ago> How did the author decide which part to present as plain fact, and which as mere activist opinion? They have a very obvious bias, and the parts supporting their bias are presented as positive.
- like_any_other 1y agoOh I'm not objecting to presenting some parts as negative and others as positive. I'm objecting to presenting some parts as uncontested truth, while others as mere "activists say" (especially since what those activists say is simply what is written in the law - there's no room for opinion).
- JoshTriplett 1y agoAbsolutely; that is a standard tool of biased writing. See also the "exonerative tense".