*Originally appearing in Jan. 23 edition of the Laurel Chronicle
A few nights ago I watched the movie J. Edgar. With the talk of wiretaps, conspiracy, and governmental spying on American citizens, I couldn’t help but draw a parallel to today’s NSA.
Former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden rocked the world with his revelations about intelligence gathering practices conducted by the NSA.
The revelations caused swift and unexpected reactions. The public was outraged (though perhaps not for long?), and political alliances were forged based on concern for personal privacy or national security, not political party affiliation.
Yeah, it was weird.
Today, it seems the public has (somewhat) moved on from the NSA leaks, even as President Obama and others promise to reform the way we collect information that can help protect our national security interests.
In a Jan. 17 nationally televised speech on NSA reforms, President Obama recognized that in our “rush to respond to a very real and novel set of threats,…the possibility that we [lost] some of our core liberties in pursuit of security also became more pronounced.”
The President recommended a series of reforms, including prohibiting spy agencies from storing Americans’ phone records (though experts agree this will take months, if not longer, to implement); restricting how we spy on foreign allies; and creating a new public advocates panel to weigh in on these issues.
His words sounded good, but his promises were ambiguous. I assume that’s intentional, since he’s walking a not-so-enviable line between protecting personal privacy and protecting America from security threats.
You could say he’s between “Iraq” and a hard place. (Government spying increased after 9/11, which led to searches for weapons of mass destruction, the fall of an Iraqi dictator, and an ever-growing NSA data collection program…)
To those who have questioned whether Snowden’s leaks have done more to harm the country than to help it, I say only this: Without the Snowden revelations, there would be no presidential address on NSA reforms and no meaningful discussion about the role of the government in spying on American citizens. It’s a simple truth, but an important one.
So, are you paying attention? According to a Pew Research Center poll, a mere eight percent of Americans have heard a lot about Obama’s proposals. Seventy-three percent say the President’s changes will have zero impact on protecting personal privacy (two out of three people felt similarly in a Rasmussen poll). Skepticism of the NSA surveillance programs keeps on growing, with 52 percent of Americans disapproving and only 38 percent saying they trust leaders to ensure spy programs are constitutional.
In the midst of this, I wondered how Jones Countians felt about the NSA spying on citizens, Edward Snowden (hero or traitor?), and general attitudes toward government overreach. Toward this end, I polled folks on Facebook…and got a dismal response. Either folks don’t care (see above), didn’t see my post, or simply didn’t want to be quoted in a column.
One response I did get, however, was insightful. Aaron Jacobson, who I know from church many years ago, said Snowden is neither a “hero or traitor. It seems a little too easy to classify in those terms.” Snowden has raised “some very serious issues that strike at the very heart of what our democracy means and what privacy and freedom mean within it.”
My father reminded me of a Ben Franklin quote, which I will paraphrase here: Those who sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither. I certainly agree with that philosophy, but its practice is more complex.
So, in summary, Snowden’s actions are controversial, but they’ve had an impact on the way leaders are publicly dealing with security and privacy issues. Whether the impact is reality or perception, long-standing or fleeting remains to be seen. Public outcry has waned, but skepticism about the spy programs keeps growing. And to top it all off, these issues really aren’t driven by either political party.
No comments:
Post a Comment