Search This Blog

Showing posts with label Prism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Prism. Show all posts

Thursday, 28 April 2016

Mission Accomplished? Snowden 'NSA Leak' had 'chilling effect' that scared people away from learning truth about terrorism

RT


"Hi I'm Ed. Everyone knows I was a subcontractor for the NSA, but no one knows I was first recruited by the CIA."
 
NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden's revelations on government mass surveillance have apparently scared a significant number of people away from searching for terrorism-related information on Wikipedia, as a new study shows readers are afraid of being investigated.

The conclusions come as the online encyclopedia giant showed a 30-percent drop in searches on terrorism-related topics - the most direct evidence yet of something called the "chilling effect,"described by University of Oxford and Toronto's Jonathon Penney as the measure of the negative impact on legal conduct that arises out of the leaks by the former NSA contractor who exposed the PRISM program.

Many in academic circles have been denying that such an effect exists, as well as its potential negative fallout. This prompted Penney to delve deeper into the issue, which has steadily been rising in popularity across academic disciplines.

His findings are published in an upcoming paper in the Berkeley Technology Law Journal. There he analyzes the fall in traffic after taking a look at 48 Wikipedia topics monitored closely by the US government on national security concerns. "Al-Qaeda," "jihad" and related searches top the list compiled by the Department of Homeland Security.

To measure the effect Penney took as his starting point a date 16 months prior to the first revelation in summer 2013. In that period the interest in terrorism had been rising mildly from 2.2 million searches at the low point to 3.0 million just before the NSA leaks. As people woke up to Snowden's revelations, the figure plummeted rapidly back to the average 2.2 million, then further below 2.0, until stabilizing at 2.5 million only in summer 2014, according to Penney's calculations.

"The Article finds not only a statistically significant immediate decline in traffic for these Wikipedia articles after June 2013, but also a change in the overall secular trend in the view count traffic, suggesting not only immediate but also long-term chilling effects resulting from the NSA/PRISM online surveillance revelations," Penney writes.

He also found that the more sensitive a topic was, the more likely it was to cause privacy concerns among the public. Penney established a list of more, and less, 'safe' topics. The safer topics, which presumably reflected only a general interest in US government security forces, retained steady levels of interest.

Penney's study joins a growing body of related research, such as that dealing with the increase in the number of online searches for privacy protection tools, like encryption and special web browsers.

More broadly, the research seeks to"offer important insights about how we should understand such chilling effects and their scope, including how they interact with other dramatic or significant events (like war and conflict) and their broader implications for privacy, US constitutional litigation, and the health of democratic society."
 
 

Saturday, 8 February 2014

The New Dark Age

Comment: Actually, there were many of us who were also arguing and "railing" that such "lurking" had been present for quite sometime. You had to connect the dots by going back to the 1960s and 70s reports and the evolution of ECHELON,  not least MAIN CORE and the evidence from Danny Casolaro But hey, let's not quibble.

-----------------------------

Antiwar

For years, this space has been arguing – railing, really – that the ideological and legal currents unleashed by America’s response to the 9/11 attacks have been leading us down the road to dictatorship: see here, here, here, and here. Back in those halcyon days, circa 2007 and much earlier, it was easy to dismiss such charges as the mental effluvia of the somewhat overwrought libertarian imagination: after all, if we’re headed for an authoritarian order of Orwellian proportions, then where are the Thought Police?

What we didn’t know was that they were lurking in the woodwork all along – spying on us, recording our phone calls, scooping up our emails, and tracking our every move. We didn’t know about the National Security Agency’s data dragnet: we hadn’t heard of PRISM, or any of the other programs that allow government snoops to sniff out dissidents and other "subversives" who might be "linked" to "terrorism."

Don’t say we didn’t warn you. 

I take very cold comfort in having been right about this, because, for one, it’s actually much worse than I thought it would be. In the wake of the Snowden revelations, and the government’s reaction, we have an ominous new development in the works, one I never foresaw: the criminalization of journalism.

The Washington Post reported, the other day, on an exchange between FBI Director James Comey and his Republican interlocutor, Rep. Mike Rogers of Michigan, reproducing the relevant and most striking part in full. The occasion was Tuesday’s session of a hearing of the House Intelligence Committee on "Worldwide Threats," with Rogers questioning Comey on the Snowden documents:

"REP. ROGERS: You – there have been discussions about selling of access to this material to both newspaper outlets and other places. Mr. Comey, to the best of your knowledge, is fencing stolen material – is that a crime?

DIRECTOR COMEY: Yes, it is.

ROGERS: And would be selling the access of classified material that is stolen from the United States government – would that be a crime?

COMEY: It would be. It’s an issue that can be complicated if it involves a news-gathering and news promulgation function, but in general, fencing or selling stolen property is a crime.

ROGERS: So if I’m a newspaper reporter for – fill in the blank – and I sell stolen material, is that legal because I’m a newspaper reporter?

COMEY: Right, if you’re a newspaper report[er] and you’re hocking stolen jewelry, it’s still a crime."
You can see where this is going, but let’s stop for a moment and check Comey’s premises: who has stolen what from whom? This is the real question at the heart of the debate over the Snowden revelations, and as usual the inhabitants of that Bizarro World known as Washington, D.C., have turned reality on its head. It was Snowden who blew the whistle on the real thieves: the NSA and the government officials who presided over the wholesale hijacking of our privacy in brazen violation of the Fourth Amendment. If anyone is "hocking" "stolen property" it is the government, which has contracted out its illegal surveillance programs to private vendors who profit from Washington’s crimes against the American people. 

Read more

 
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...