The NYTimes Plays Its Role In 'Keeping Fear Alive' With Pure Fearmongering Over PATRIOT Act Renewal
from the all-the-propaganda-that's-fit-to-print dept
Earlier this year, we wrote about the psychological games that surveillance state defenders play -- both on themselves and the public -- to continually ratchet up programs that show no evidence of working. In it, we pointed to a great post by the ACLU's Kade Crockford, highlighting a rare case where an FBI official was forthright about what's really going on:If you’re submitting budget proposals for a law enforcement agency, for an intelligence agency, you’re not going to submit the proposal that ‘We won the war on terror and everything’s great,’ cuz the first thing that’s gonna happen is your budget’s gonna be cut in half. You know, it’s my opposite of Jesse Jackson’s ‘Keep Hope Alive’—it’s ‘Keep Fear Alive.’ Keep it alive.Keep fear alive. Keep it alive. And, apparently, one great way to do that is to basically get the NY Times to run pure government propaganda in the form of simply repeating anonymous fearmongering from administration officials who set up a call for this exact purpose:
“What you’re doing, essentially, is you’re playing national security Russian roulette,” one senior administration official said of allowing the powers to lapse. That prospect appears increasingly likely with the measure, the USA Freedom Act, stalled and lawmakers in their home states and districts during a congressional recess.First, note the anonymity, even though this isn't a leak or a reporter sniffing out a story and needing to protect sources. This is a "briefing organized by the White House" where they play stupid games in demanding anonymity for the sole purpose of avoiding accountability. Second, note the blatant fearmongering without any specifics. It's pure "keep fear alive" in action -- aided along by a stenographer at the NY Times.
“We’re in uncharted waters,” another senior member of the administration said at a briefing organized by the White House, where three officials spoke with reporters about the consequences of inaction by Congress. “We have not had to confront addressing the terrorist threat without these authorities, and it’s going to be fraught with unnecessary risk.”
All the propaganda that's fit to print.
As the Intercept rightly notes, this piece was published without even the slightest critical look into the statements by those officials:
Once again, two separate government review boards, as well as judges who have looked over the program and Senators who have been briefed on the full extent of the program in question, have all said that the bulk metadata collection program has not proven useful in stopping terrorist attacks. At all.Worst of all, it’s all published uncritically. There’s not a syllable challenging or questioning any of these dire warnings. No Patriot Act opponent is heard from. None of the multiple facts exposing these scare tactics as manipulative and false are referenced.
It’s just government propaganda masquerading as a news article, where anonymous officials warn the country that they will die if the Patriot Act isn’t renewed immediately, while decreeing that Congressional critics of the law will have blood on their hands due to their refusal to obey. In other words, it’s a perfect museum exhibit for how government officials in both parties and American media outlets have collaborated for 15 years to enact one radical measure after the next and destroy any chance for rational discourse about it.
And, of course, blatant fearmongering without comparing the costs and (lack of) benefits is completely useless. Again, it could be taken to any extreme. Would putting real-time cameras hovering over every living human being 24/7 allow the government to find out who was plotting a terrorist attack? In theory, yes. But everyone would consider it a gross violation of privacy. Just because a tool might be useful doesn't mean that it's the right thing to do. So, here we have a case of a "tool" that is both a clear violation of our civil liberties and one that hasn't even been found to be useful.
Yet why is the NY Times -- the so-called "paper of record" -- repeating blindly government propaganda about how important it is to keep the program alive? Keep fear alive, NY Times. Keep it alive.
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: journalism, keep fear alive, patriot act, reporting, section 215, stenography
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Once again, with feeling
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No the fuck we're not. We've been find for hundreds of years. This ramping up of insanity has only been a recent blip on this country's history.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Oh, right. SCAREY-PEE-YOUR-PANTS FEAR, is why. Don't know how that didn't occur to me.
-
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Geez, you'd think after 14 or so years being in uncharted waters, someone would have the common sense to make a fucking chart!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Can't say I agree with him on that, though. If this happens, we know exactly where we'll be: back where we were in the 90s, before the Patriot Act.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
If we're currently in uncharted waters, then what we're doing clearly isn't working - several terrorist attacks have happened despite the "patriot" act being in place.
And like you said - if we're in uncharted waters after it (hopefully) expires, we'll be back in the 90's, where we were.
Either way, the dipshit making the quote isn't making a convincing argument.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Russian roulette, eh?
Since Russian roulette is played by pointing a partially loaded gun at one's own head, how about we simply not do that? Because the way I see it, the NSA is the bullet.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Russian roulette, eh?
I do not see an issue with that, it is the NSA after all, that will be taking the bullet, if it is not renewed.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Any time I see an article sourced to an unnamed official, it see that as a failing of the news department to uphold accountability. I also see most of it as propaganda attempting to change public opinion.
This is one time the congress critters need to lose at Russian Roulette so that the public will become the winners.
I'm tired of the FUD, tired of the propaganda, and tired of the lies. We have the best laws money can buy by the most corrupted officials that can be elected.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
It merits repeating.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
In Other News!
Thus the lizard people, who enjoy the taste of human flesh, are now openly controlling the US government. The Reptilians have acheived their aims of finally being able to freely spread their propaganda in an effort to prep the Earth for their impending invasion.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Because money, that's why
Why? Because fear, much like sex, sells. A lot of people have the attention span of gnats, and if you're not dangling something shiny in front of their eyes, they're going to go elsewhere, and the newspapers know it.
Which do you think is going to sell more papers and get more attention, 'Program that meet absolutely zero of it's stated goals and was completely useless about to expire', or 'American spy agencies about to be critically crippled, opening country up to terrorists attacks!'
There's also the whole 'Say what the government wants you to say or no more exclusives for you', but I'm guessing most of the fearmongering is simply profit driven, they know panicky people are easier to manipulate and sell to, so that's what they try and create.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
NYT + Jews + you = moronic, bigoted comment
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
-- Andrew Rosenthal, NYT Editor
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
So is Techdirt. And the Intercept. Both of which are calling out the NYTimes.
Go away you ignorant fool.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The last few US governments have been controlled by NeoCons allied with the American-Israeli PAC. NYT is just one of the NeoCons' propaganda outlets. You do the math.
You do realize there is a difference between Jews and Zionists, yes?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Government budgets
And this has been the norm for ALL agencies at ALL levels of government for some time. Even getting an identical budget for maintenance of existing property and/or programs can sometimes be a chore. Look at our highways and schools for example. Some are in excellent condition and some need to be razed and rebuilt. (Yes, some schools and other government buildings ought to be razed and NOT rebuilt, but that's another story.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Does is matter at all?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Does is matter at all?
So yes, it does matter.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Does is matter at all?
https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2015/05/why_the_current.html
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Gray Lady Down
November 16, 2010
by William McGowan (Author)
The New York Times was once considered the gold standard in American journalism and the most trusted news organization in America. Today, it is generally understood to be a vehicle for politically correct ideologies, tattered liberal pieties, and a repeated victim of journalistic scandal and institutional embarrassment.
http://www.amazon.com/Gray-Lady-Down-Decline-America/dp/B0096EQ276
The precipitous decline of journalistic standards at the New York Times has placed it in the lowly position of being perfectly placed for collecting bird cage droppings.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Is it just me. . .
Only difference is that the 'war on terror' version of reefer madness, was produced by ISIS! And while the videos are certainly horrific and brutal, how many people have they killed? How many were American? How many of those American's willingly went into a dangerous place knowing the risks?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The WH strategy from the start of the Snowden disclosures has been to try to conflate the domestic phone call program with all "bulk collection". Why do we never hear about internet and financial and location and the other bulk surveillance programs that are undoubtedly running? Please be more precise in your language. The domestic phone call metadata program is a tiny fraction of the total surveillance. It must be made crystal clear exactly what we are talking about.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Fearmongering? Business as usual
So their new strategy was simple: Stall. Get enough obstruction going in Congress to stall USA Freedom from passing. Stall on US Patriot as well, to keep USA Freedom proponents from getting a sense of urgency. Don't worry about US Patriot for the moment. Just stall.
Then, two days before expiration of US Patriot, they threaten to call Congress a bunch of pansies on national security. So now that it's too late for USA Freedom, Congress will give in, do the quick and dirty, and just renew US Patriot Act for another year.
So you might say it's fear mongering. To me it looks like a strategy they cooked up when USA Freedom reared its ugly head. The result will be exactly what they want: US Patriot rides again.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Because if they refused to parrot this !@#$, the gov't would cut off their access to newsworthy "anonymous sources" leaks.
I can't read the NYT anymore without a snide, sneering expression on my face. "Chyaaa, right!" comes to mind. The crap they spout about Ukraine, Russia, and Putin is revolting, not to mention pretty pathetically done. Read what NYT says, then find hundreds of others who actually tell you what went on and who the players are and what their agenda is. NYT comes up looking stupid every time.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"With the power set to expire at 11:59 p.m. on Sunday, a senior administration official said, the N.S.A. has a team on "hot standby" and has contacted telecommunications companies with an action plan. Eight hours before the deadline, at 3:59 p.m., the agency would begin shutting off servers that run the program and revoking access to it's databases. Rebooting would take about a day, the official said, and would entail going back to the telecommunication providers and obtaining a court order."
OMG, a court order! Heaven forbid the US Gov actually follows the law (Constitution) and obtains a court order before searching through people's phone, internet, email, text, and google search records it warrantlessly seizes.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"all-the-propaganda-that's-fit-to-print"
"all-the-propaganda-that-fits-to-print"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Useful
And, of course, blatant fearmongering without comparing the costs and (lack of) benefits is completely useless.
Actually it's proven extremely useful to a particular group of people.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
NYT
[ link to this | view in chronology ]