4 ms·

I'm really excited! I like the incremental release, I think it builds momentum in the way that a full dump could not. Just as one story has been thoroughly expl

by pvnick 13y ago

I'm really excited! I like the incremental release, I think it builds momentum in the way that a full dump could not. Just as one story has been thoroughly explored, the next one comes out.

wavefunction 13y ago
Great point. I'd like to see David Brooks and the rest of the useful idiots try and struggle to keep up with the releases. I'd like to imagine folks as smart as Snowden, Poitras, and Greenwald have approached the releases of these documents strategically, considering the inevitable responses from the status quo and its servants. I'd imagine it wouldn't be hard to predict their responses to each type of revelation. They try to downplay the scope of the snooping? Retort with documents showing the number of collaborating service providers and types of materials gathered. They try to downplay the impact of this on innocent Americans? Release documents showing specific abuses. etc. and ad nauseaum until the hypocrites, phonies, and apologists are exposed for exactly what they are. I suppose only time will tell, but I know a lot of people that are getting more and more interested in this.
- dragonwriter 13y ago
  > I'd like to see David Brooks and the rest of the useful idiots try and struggle to keep up with the releases. Its not like Brook's facile drivel takes all that much effort; its not like its designed to stand up to scrutiny by anyone thinking deeply, its just to give people an excuse not to think deeply.
- dataisfun 13y ago
  I don't think they'll highlight specific abuses, as greenwald already commented on the difficulty of that. If you point out some innocent being surveilled, you've just exposed them to the world. If you point out someone guilty being surveilled (though guilt would be impossible to determine a priori and from their perch), you've just tipped them off. I'm very curious to see the content of the next releases, and like the one of the commenters above, I do hope there's a deadman switch, though killing greenwald now would be an epic mistake on the govt's part. THAT would set off a firestorm. More than likely, they've already hacked his computer and have read the docs and are preparing how to respond to the upcoming revelations.
  - Filligree 13y ago
    Well, you know. If he has any sense, his computer is offline. And powered off.
eightyone 13y ago
Also, the incremental release strategy makes it easier to catch the government and companies involved telling lies and contradictions. Never show all your cards at once.
wisty 13y ago
Basic PR. Dump bad news (at a time when reporters are unlikely to pick it up), trickle out good news, and it gives you a more positive image. They are doing the opposite - trying to get maximum outrage over the stuff they leak. That's why companies often need PR consultants. Because they are tempted to try to keep stuff under wraps, even when it's slowly trickling out. They need an adult to tell them "people will find out anyway, so just dump the whole thing in a press release on a Friday, so you get it all out in one headline". Plus, reporters will be reporting your spin on it, and you look like you've made an honest mistake and are coming clean. The NSA should probably figure out what's getting leaked, then spoil the PR attack by coming clean. Somehow, I can't see them doing it.
- legutierr 13y ago
  I think this is a pretty sophisticated PR strategy, actually, especially with regards the timing of the disclosure of Snowden's identity. It's not as formulaic as you describe... They release some tantalizing tidbits (they are tidbits, aren't they? we already had heard about the metadata in 2006, didn't we?), and at the peak of interest (where did this come from?!?) release Snowden's identity in a carefully crafted video. They maximize control over his story before the government even has any idea who he is, before they can even think how to paint a picture of him in a negative light. Once the media has spent its powder covering Snowden (letting him speak for himself in a gorgeous HD video), there is little the government can do to add to the story; Snowden's identity is largely frozen in the picture that Greenwald et al have painted, while the government PR machine is struggling to come up with a cohesive strategy, let alone a response. Then, after the Snowden story has run its course (at the point where talking about Snowden any more will mean losing viewers), they drop the big disclosures. At least that's my prediction. So what might the next disclosures be? This is pure paranoid speculation, but I think Snowden hinted at it in the video: the government is recording all telephone conversations, but storing it according to a legal theory that says that as long as no one actually listens to the recordings, they don't need a warrant. They obtain a warrant that is individual-specific, but instead of using that warrant to capture evidence of current actions, they use that warrant to retrieve all of the target's past activities.
  - 13y ago

by pvnick 13y ago

I'm really excited! I like the incremental release, I think it builds momentum in the way that a full dump could not. Just as one story has been thoroughly explored, the next one comes out.

wavefunction 13y ago

Great point. I'd like to see David Brooks and the rest of the useful idiots try and struggle to keep up with the releases. I'd like to imagine folks as smart as Snowden, Poitras, and Greenwald have approached the releases of these documents strategically, considering the inevitable responses from the status quo and its servants. I'd imagine it wouldn't be hard to predict their responses to each type of revelation. They try to downplay the scope of the snooping? Retort with documents showing the number of collaborating service providers and types of materials gathered. They try to downplay the impact of this on innocent Americans? Release documents showing specific abuses. etc. and ad nauseaum until the hypocrites, phonies, and apologists are exposed for exactly what they are. I suppose only time will tell, but I know a lot of people that are getting more and more interested in this.

dragonwriter 13y ago
> I'd like to see David Brooks and the rest of the useful idiots try and struggle to keep up with the releases. Its not like Brook's facile drivel takes all that much effort; its not like its designed to stand up to scrutiny by anyone thinking deeply, its just to give people an excuse not to think deeply.
dataisfun 13y ago
I don't think they'll highlight specific abuses, as greenwald already commented on the difficulty of that. If you point out some innocent being surveilled, you've just exposed them to the world. If you point out someone guilty being surveilled (though guilt would be impossible to determine a priori and from their perch), you've just tipped them off. I'm very curious to see the content of the next releases, and like the one of the commenters above, I do hope there's a deadman switch, though killing greenwald now would be an epic mistake on the govt's part. THAT would set off a firestorm. More than likely, they've already hacked his computer and have read the docs and are preparing how to respond to the upcoming revelations.
- Filligree 13y ago
  Well, you know. If he has any sense, his computer is offline. And powered off.

eightyone 13y ago

Also, the incremental release strategy makes it easier to catch the government and companies involved telling lies and contradictions. Never show all your cards at once.

wisty 13y ago

Basic PR. Dump bad news (at a time when reporters are unlikely to pick it up), trickle out good news, and it gives you a more positive image. They are doing the opposite - trying to get maximum outrage over the stuff they leak. That's why companies often need PR consultants. Because they are tempted to try to keep stuff under wraps, even when it's slowly trickling out. They need an adult to tell them "people will find out anyway, so just dump the whole thing in a press release on a Friday, so you get it all out in one headline". Plus, reporters will be reporting your spin on it, and you look like you've made an honest mistake and are coming clean. The NSA should probably figure out what's getting leaked, then spoil the PR attack by coming clean. Somehow, I can't see them doing it.

legutierr 13y ago
I think this is a pretty sophisticated PR strategy, actually, especially with regards the timing of the disclosure of Snowden's identity. It's not as formulaic as you describe... They release some tantalizing tidbits (they are tidbits, aren't they? we already had heard about the metadata in 2006, didn't we?), and at the peak of interest (where did this come from?!?) release Snowden's identity in a carefully crafted video. They maximize control over his story before the government even has any idea who he is, before they can even think how to paint a picture of him in a negative light. Once the media has spent its powder covering Snowden (letting him speak for himself in a gorgeous HD video), there is little the government can do to add to the story; Snowden's identity is largely frozen in the picture that Greenwald et al have painted, while the government PR machine is struggling to come up with a cohesive strategy, let alone a response. Then, after the Snowden story has run its course (at the point where talking about Snowden any more will mean losing viewers), they drop the big disclosures. At least that's my prediction. So what might the next disclosures be? This is pure paranoid speculation, but I think Snowden hinted at it in the video: the government is recording all telephone conversations, but storing it according to a legal theory that says that as long as no one actually listens to the recordings, they don't need a warrant. They obtain a warrant that is individual-specific, but instead of using that warrant to capture evidence of current actions, they use that warrant to retrieve all of the target's past activities.
- 13y ago