3 ms·

Putting aside this story for one minute and looking at the larger picture one thing I find fascinating is how the protagonists are absolutely winning the PR bat

Putting aside this story for one minute and looking at the larger picture one thing I find fascinating is how the protagonists are absolutely winning the PR battle. The irony here is that when Snowden or this owner go public the overly secretive government can't or won't reply in an effective manner. That secrecy, so effective when operating in the dark, is suddenly impotent when the light is shined on it. The only attempts at any type of rebuttal have come from Obama and have had little to no effect to change the tidal flow here. So we just get this one sided narrative with a "fresh" new story every 2 or 3 days. It may be disturbing that he can be arrested but is that really news to anyone here? What's the point of a surveillance order if you can't back it up? We lock people up for contempt of court. You have to have a stick if you want folks to comply. Yet here is this story a few days after the main story and just as Lavabit was falling off the global media front page. This keeps the issue alive and hammers the government again. All trademarks of an excellent PR campaign. This narrative is having a withering effect upon those driving these programs as politicians see their constituents slowly turn from understanding of the need for these programs to alarmed by them. That the government has been unable to mount any sort of credible counter story is pretty amazing to me and somewhat a relief. After all, true police states have amazing propaganda machines. This one feels reminiscent of an intern running marketing at a startup!

Spooky23 13y ago
The government has a very effective methodology for protecting things it deems important. Congress got a little feisty about these programs, and for a week we started hearing about "chatter" that was threatening US embassies. We closed embassies and said scary things. Then we bombed some Al Queda in the Arabian Peninsula folks in Yemen. The next day, with much less fanfare, it was reported that it wasn't "chatter" (which implies stuff from the NSA monitoring), but a specific warning from an official in the government of Yemen. These sorts of things are very effective at controlling Congress, especially House members. Nobody wants to be the Congressman who pushed to shutdown programs that thwart terrorists. At the end of the day, what you think doesn't matter. It's what your Congressional representatives think -- and the ability of the administration to manipulate the general public's sense of fear makes it difficult to dismantle these programs.
- jusben1369 13y ago
  The political backdrop for the US embassy closing was more the traditional Democratic vs Republican back and forth. The right and Fox news hammered this administration on Benghazi (depending on your POV that was entirely justified or horrible partisan politics) with pretty good effect. Therefore, at the slightest threat of another attack on an embassy the administration goes into PR panic mode. No WAY can we have a second attack on a consulate within 12 - 18 months - our opponents will have a field day in the press for weeks. So you have the over reaction of closing down so many embassies.

Spooky23 13y ago

The government has a very effective methodology for protecting things it deems important. Congress got a little feisty about these programs, and for a week we started hearing about "chatter" that was threatening US embassies. We closed embassies and said scary things. Then we bombed some Al Queda in the Arabian Peninsula folks in Yemen. The next day, with much less fanfare, it was reported that it wasn't "chatter" (which implies stuff from the NSA monitoring), but a specific warning from an official in the government of Yemen. These sorts of things are very effective at controlling Congress, especially House members. Nobody wants to be the Congressman who pushed to shutdown programs that thwart terrorists. At the end of the day, what you think doesn't matter. It's what your Congressional representatives think -- and the ability of the administration to manipulate the general public's sense of fear makes it difficult to dismantle these programs.

jusben1369 13y ago
The political backdrop for the US embassy closing was more the traditional Democratic vs Republican back and forth. The right and Fox news hammered this administration on Benghazi (depending on your POV that was entirely justified or horrible partisan politics) with pretty good effect. Therefore, at the slightest threat of another attack on an embassy the administration goes into PR panic mode. No WAY can we have a second attack on a consulate within 12 - 18 months - our opponents will have a field day in the press for weeks. So you have the over reaction of closing down so many embassies.