The Press Lumps Ed Snowden And Chelsea Manning In With Mass Murderers, Actual Spies
from the all-the-same dept
Many in the press still seem to have difficulty recognizing that a whistleblower, even one disliked by the government, isn't somehow an automatic pariah to society. Instead, they like to lump them in with actual law breakers. Here are two recent examples. First up is the Washingtonian, who seems to think that Ed Snowden and Chelsea Manning should be viewed in the same light as actual spies -- people who famously chose to sell secrets to our enemies or to help those enemies against the US. Lumping Manning and Snowden in with Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, Benedict Arnold, Aldrich Ames, John Walker Lindh and others suggests a profound misunderstanding of what Snowden and Manning did: releasing evidence of significant wrongdoing by the US government to the press. You would think if anyone could understand it, it should be the press.
Either way, even if you think the above chart is okay, the following one is simply outrageous. As pointed out by the ACLU's Jameel Jaffer, Time Magazine has put together a graphic comparing Snowden and Manning to mass murderers Nidal Hasan and Aaron Alexis.
These are both subtle ways in which the press is trying to smear Snowden and Manning, by lumping them in with crimes of which they are not guilty.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: bradley manning, chelsea manning, ed snowden, espionage, journalism, leaks, murder, spies, whistleblowers
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
The problematic part is the inference the article wants you to make.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hatchet jobs!
But first, a word from our sponsor: the US government.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ed Snowden = Murderer
Chelsea Manning = Actual Spies
Government "Mission Accomplished"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not Jonathan Pollard?
Oh right...NSA spies on Americans and hands the data to Israel. Yeh I can see the problem with writing a propaganda piece mentioning pollard.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The press
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The press
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The press
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The press
FIFY
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The press
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The press
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Also, the evidence against Mrs. Rosenberg being a spy is actually pretty flimsy, she was never even given access to US Nuclear secrets by the government. The government just charged her initially in an attempt to push her husband to confess to the crime to save her, which failed. Then they decided not to drop the charges against her. The evidence against Mr. Rosenberg however is much more damning.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I don't know, it seems to me that the US government is looking for untrained lap dogs for employees now. Anyone that dare might be intelligent enough to decide on the right or wrong of their actions are automatically considered terrorists, thus they can now lump them together.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
As for the "whistleblowers" and the release of information to foreign governments, the fact many of these documents are published is a release of information to foreign governments. Much has been made here that some kind of a vetting process is being applied before information is published. Likely so, but then again it must be asked what particular expertise and insight the vetters have enabling them to determine what is OK to publish and what is not?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Yes, that's clearly what they're saying *as we said in the post*. But I'm curious how you consider giving Manning and Snowden clearance an example of problems "slipping through the cracks" or how they can be compared to the two mass murderers?
As for the "whistleblowers" and the release of information to foreign governments, the fact many of these documents are published is a release of information to foreign governments.
No, it's a release to the public. Yes, foreign governments can also read it, but the focus is on the public. You do understand the difference, right?
Much has been made here that some kind of a vetting process is being applied before information is published. Likely so, but then again it must be asked what particular expertise and insight the vetters have enabling them to determine what is OK to publish and what is not?
Really? Just a warning: you don't want to go down the path you're starting now, because you're going to look even more ridiculous than you usually do. Because you appear to be starting to argue that the press shouldn't be allowed to report on secret government programs unless they have secret clearance themselves. If you had even the slightest experience with these matters, you'd know what a ridiculous suggestion that is. I know that you're a government apologist, but really, this takes your apologism to new levels.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Toeing the line
That means the propaganda filter is on "low" and usually the government's opinion is going to rule the message.
Ordinary people are to be indoctrinated into the message that nobody has the right to have a conscience and everyone is a potential traitor if they do.
Of course there is a clear red line between actual traitors, spies, terrorists and the likes of Manning and Snowden. But do not inform the government or the media about this, because it will cause them a nervous breakdown.
Some of the worst traitors like Pollard were in place for decades and never detected until someone investigated them due to basic suspicion. Otherwise, they would have kept on spying until they died.
That says a hell of a lot about the security of our actual real secret stuff, and it's not good.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
News flash to Mike: problem is a FEW BIG corporations.
Who Owns the Media?
Massive corporations dominate the U.S. media landscape. Through a history of mergers and acquisitions, these companies have concentrated their control over what we see, hear and read. In many cases, these companies are vertically integrated, controlling everything from initial production to final distribution. In the interactive charts below we reveal who owns what.
http://www.freepress.net/ownership/chart
This one lays out a bunch of numbers:
http://stateofthemedia.org/media-ownership/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: News flash to Mike: problem is a FEW BIG corporations.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: News flash to Mike: problem is a FEW BIG corporations.
Have a DMCA vote.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Thanks, OOB!
Makes the point I was addressing all that much clearer.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Wrong Name
Gender is not a choice. I do not get to demand that people call me Hillary Clinton. He can live however he wants. I do not judge people on what clothes they choose to wear or who they can and can not have sex with.
But I will not call Bradley by some girls name just because.
And ... Prince was never just some symbol either.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Wrong Name
That's just silly. Of course you get to demand this -- and even make it all legal -- if you want to.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Wrong Name
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Wrong Name
Yeah, you do. You won't admit it to us, and maybe you even have difficulty admitting it to yourself, but you do. Your little rant makes that pretty clear.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
From Wikipedia:
The U.S. military detained Toguri for a year before releasing her for lack of evidence. Department of Justice officials agreed that her broadcasts were "innocuous". But when Toguri tried to return to the US, a popular uproar ensued, prompting the Federal Bureau of Investigation to renew its investigation of Toguri's wartime activities. Her 1949 trial resulted in a conviction on one of eight counts of treason. In 1974, investigative journalists found that key witnesses claimed they were forced to lie during testimony. Toguri was pardoned by U.S. President Gerald Ford in 1977.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tokyo_Rose
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Category Error
Category errors pervade political rhetoric. Pick apart the next article you read on 'terrorists' and 'terrorism' and consider whether the actions and actors in the story have been appropriately categorized.
Sadly, this verbal sleight of hand passes by most people pretty easily. Whether by inherent bias, intellectual laziness, or inattention, such disingenuous category errors are committed constantly.
However, instances like these (from the articles in Mike's post) are excellent opportunities to point out the abundant, willful fallacies bandied by [insert person to blame]. I don't think any one group or person is to blame. It seems that too many people in just the right positions are terribly clueless, unthinking, solipsists disconnected to the affects of their actions.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What happened to innocent until proven guilty?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
History lesson
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mirror's Edge nailed it...
~Chapter 1
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]