> Again, PRISM isn't mass surveillance (as it needs specific selectors) I don't agree with this assertion. If recording as much as possible that everyone does

> Again, PRISM isn't mass surveillance (as it needs specific selectors) I don't agree with this assertion. If recording as much as possible that everyone does via a computer is not mass surveillance, then what would be? That is what is happening, and it is mass surveillance. Why is mass surveillance bad? Because of the chilling effect it has on freedom of speech and freedom of association. These things still apply even when the government promises not to read the data until you come to their attention. So even if you deny the term "mass surveillance", then this conditional surveillance is bad for all the same reasons.