5 ms·

A congressman saying that an interview should not take place really tells us all that we need to know about just how much an interview should take place. I can

by Crito 13y ago

A congressman saying that an interview should not take place really tells us all that we need to know about just how much an interview should take place. I can think of no stronger endorsement of an interview.

kevando 13y ago
I didn't even know it was happening, and thanks to him I can now watch it live :)
- chris_overseas 13y ago
  I didn't know about this either until now. This is a great example of the Streisand Effect in action http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect
  - simonh 13y ago
    Unless he's a complete idiot, of course the Senator knows that calling for denying Snowden publicity is actually just going to get Snowden more publicity. That's irrelevant as long as making such a call gets him more publicity for his anti-Snowden credentials too.
    - wooter 13y ago
      well, he definitely got himself on the incumbents-whose-challenger-i-will-financially-support list
    - satellitecat 13y ago
      >Unless he's a complete idiot Possibly...
- minikomi 13y ago
  Maybe he's a Wikileaks supporter, cleverly drumming up attention for the speech.
  - SuddsMcDuff 13y ago
    That would be quite clever. Remember he's a politician.
- WickyNilliams 13y ago
  For the life of me, i cannot find a link to a live stream. Are you talking about seeing it in person, or is it available online somewhere?
  - bradleysmith 13y ago
    http://new.livestream.com/texastribune/events/2823117 http://new.livestream.com/texastribune/events/2823117
qq66 13y ago
The notion that the congressman is always wrong is about as wrong as the notion that he is always right.
- rosser 13y ago
  I'm having a very hard time finding that claim in Crito's comment. Are you sure he's saying that?
- venomsnake 13y ago
  I read mostly as a struggle against government imposed censorship. If government doesn't want to talk about something it should be talked about (very narrow NS exceptions allowed)
  - DerpDerpDerp 13y ago
    I really have trouble with the national security argument: can you think of a case where we'd have a secret that admitting the existence of something would seriously harm the nation (ie, talking about the fact we have nuclear missiles, not the details of how to build them) AND which experts in other nations would be unable to guess we were working on? It seems that it's only used to cover potentially illegal things that the administration/military/etc don't want to talk about with the public, rather than because it would actually harm the nation to talk about them (except, of course, that people might tell them no).
    - jerf 13y ago
      Yes; specific military plans. Study the details of the Normandy invasion for one of the clearest examples in history. Specific capabilities of military hardware is another example. Mind you, I don't disagree that some unsavory things get hidden behind that curtain. I wouldn't even disagree that the majority of things hidden behind that curtain in modern times may be unsavory. Unfortuantely, the solution isn't as simple as just removing the curtain.
      - venomsnake 13y ago
pekk 13y ago
That sounds good for the current situation, but it generalizes badly; for example, let's make the head of KKK the keynote speaker at my event, or make an interview with him the centerpiece. Good event? Maybe not.
- furyg3 13y ago
  Why should a congressman care about this?

by Crito 13y ago

kevando 13y ago

I didn't even know it was happening, and thanks to him I can now watch it live :)

chris_overseas 13y ago
I didn't know about this either until now. This is a great example of the Streisand Effect in action http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect
- simonh 13y ago
  Unless he's a complete idiot, of course the Senator knows that calling for denying Snowden publicity is actually just going to get Snowden more publicity. That's irrelevant as long as making such a call gets him more publicity for his anti-Snowden credentials too.
  - wooter 13y ago
    well, he definitely got himself on the incumbents-whose-challenger-i-will-financially-support list
  - satellitecat 13y ago
    >Unless he's a complete idiot Possibly...
minikomi 13y ago
Maybe he's a Wikileaks supporter, cleverly drumming up attention for the speech.
- SuddsMcDuff 13y ago
  That would be quite clever. Remember he's a politician.
WickyNilliams 13y ago
For the life of me, i cannot find a link to a live stream. Are you talking about seeing it in person, or is it available online somewhere?
- bradleysmith 13y ago
  http://new.livestream.com/texastribune/events/2823117 http://new.livestream.com/texastribune/events/2823117

qq66 13y ago

The notion that the congressman is always wrong is about as wrong as the notion that he is always right.

rosser 13y ago
I'm having a very hard time finding that claim in Crito's comment. Are you sure he's saying that?
venomsnake 13y ago
I read mostly as a struggle against government imposed censorship. If government doesn't want to talk about something it should be talked about (very narrow NS exceptions allowed)
- DerpDerpDerp 13y ago
  I really have trouble with the national security argument: can you think of a case where we'd have a secret that admitting the existence of something would seriously harm the nation (ie, talking about the fact we have nuclear missiles, not the details of how to build them) AND which experts in other nations would be unable to guess we were working on? It seems that it's only used to cover potentially illegal things that the administration/military/etc don't want to talk about with the public, rather than because it would actually harm the nation to talk about them (except, of course, that people might tell them no).
  - jerf 13y ago
    Yes; specific military plans. Study the details of the Normandy invasion for one of the clearest examples in history. Specific capabilities of military hardware is another example. Mind you, I don't disagree that some unsavory things get hidden behind that curtain. I wouldn't even disagree that the majority of things hidden behind that curtain in modern times may be unsavory. Unfortuantely, the solution isn't as simple as just removing the curtain.
    - venomsnake 13y ago

pekk 13y ago

That sounds good for the current situation, but it generalizes badly; for example, let's make the head of KKK the keynote speaker at my event, or make an interview with him the centerpiece. Good event? Maybe not.

furyg3 13y ago
Why should a congressman care about this?