Photocopying Michelle Obama's Diary, Just In Case

Hugh Pickens DOT Com writes "Conor Friedersdorf has a good (and humorous) read in the Atlantic about the analogy that President Obama has settled on to explain his theory of the NSA surveillance controversy to reporters. 'The question is how do we make the American people more comfortable?' Obama said. 'If I tell Michelle that I did the dishes ... and she's a little skeptical, well, I'd like her to trust me, but maybe I need to bring her back and show her the dishes and not just have her take my word for it.' The analogy has been widely panned, and for good reason. Friedersdorf writes that he has come up with a much better analogy. What if 'Barack snuck into Michelle's closet one day, dug through her belongings until he found her diary, and photocopied it. Then he replaced the original, locked the copy in his desk, and didn't think about it much until she found out months later and furiously confronted him.' Admittedly, it isn't a perfect analogy either says Friedersdorf, 'but it comes a lot closer than Obama did to capturing the actual stakes in this debate, and the reason so many Americans are angry at him.'" In related news, Snowden's father disagrees that his son isn't a patriot: "My son has spoken the truth, and he has sacrificed more than either the president of the United States or Peter King have ever in their political careers or their American lives. So how they choose to characterize him really doesn't carry that much weight with me."

Comments

Analogy needs one fix

[Sepodati]

The analogy would be better if the diary was left out in the open, but closed, mind you, for everyone to see. You still shouldn't open it, but it is sitting right there and not locked up.

Or everyday the diary was handed off to a random member of the public to hold on to... and not open, of course.

Re:Analogy needs one fix

[khallow]

The analogy would be better if the diary was left out in the open, but closed, mind you, for everyone to see.

Everyone being everyone who can sniff on a internet backbone. That doesn't strike me as an appropriate analogy, because not everyone can do that, while most people can open a closed book.

Re:Analogy needs one fix

[howardd21]

Or even a bit more. Barak photocopies the diary as described and sets it out for all to see, and it has a lock and key, but not a very good one. And nobody except for Barak and a select few have a key. There is little accountability into when the key will be used, it could be a curious person who likes to feel power; or if they want to make it official, they go and see a FISA judge who is quick to agree, since he is part of the overall system fighting the enemy. A few months later Barak notes that a terrorist has popped up on the radar, and in the interest of national security he reads Michelle's diary from cover to cover. There is nothing in there about the terrorist, but he does note that she has a very close relationship with the gardner.

Re:Analogy needs one fix

[khallow]

this where the expectation of privacy comes from? Because only a subset of people have the capability to open the book, you expect it to be private?

You could keep it in a locked safe, and there would still be a subset of people who would have the right combination of equipment, skills, and/or political power to get in and read that book. No, that's not the source of the expectation of privacy or nothing would ever be private.

The expectation of privacy comes from how email is used. You write it up, it gets sent only to the addresses you specify, and there's no third party that gets a copy of the email (it's not like speaking in a room with a third party presence). You aren't CCing the NSA. No one can overhear the message in normal usage unless they happen to have an email address that gets the message (say because you sent the email to a huge list) or one of your recipients forwards the email on in some way.

Re:Analogy needs one fix

[hairyfeet]

Why bother with analogies in the first place when you are talking about copying some of the worst traits of oppressive regimes? We have seen time and time again how well the chilling effect works, after all it turned out when the wall fell and access to the actual records came out the STASI were "only" watching 10% of the population but that was enough to keep them in line,why? Because everybody thought they were the 1 in 10 and thus thought everything they did was being recorded and this constant scrutiny kept them in line.

I would STRONGLY suggest everyone here watch The End Of America by Naomi Wolf and please note this was made in 2007, BEFORE all this extra bullshit came out, and also note how many examples of what she calls "the playbook" of oppressive and non-free regimes is being played here even as we speak, the same kind of shit used by Uncle Joe and the crazy Austrian is happening right here in the USA folks. Now I personally believe it is because the ruling class knows we are gonna have a worldwide collapse that will make the great depression look like a flash crash and want the system of oppression in place in the hopes of being able to scare the peasants in line. Now personally I don't think it will work, once the checks that keep the peasants from starving disappear and it takes a wheelbarrow full of money to buy a loaf of bread the peasants won't fear because honestly they won't have anything to lose, but in any case you watch Wolf's video and look at the other warning signs and its pretty obvious that somebody at the top is pushing REAL hard to bring fascist police state tactics here and whomever is pushing this? Is obviously winning.

Re:Analogy needs one fix

[ShanghaiBill]

Or even better: He photocopies the diary, but his daughter, Sasha, notices and tells her mom. Obama then tries to convince Michelle that Sasha is a traitor and that they should disown her.

Patriotism

[bfandreas]

PATRIOTISM, n.
Combustible rubbish ready to the torch of any one ambitious to illuminate his name.

In Dr. Johnson's famous dictionary patriotism is defined as the last resort of a scoundrel. With all due respect to an enlightened but inferior lexicographer I beg to submit that it is the first.

Be wary when the word "patriotism" is being used. Whatever precedes or follows usually clocks in very high on the bullshit scale. It feels like it's being used to trigger a killswitch in the human mind.

Re:Patriotism

[smillie]

he has sacrificed more A bank robber who gets killed during the robbery sacrifices a lot, he lost his life and his future. Does that automatically make the bank robber a Patriot? Of course not.

The difference is that the bank robber is doing his thing for his own benefite whereas Snowden gets no benefit, all the benefit goes to his countrymen.

Snowden is a Patriot--his Dad

[Anonymous Coward]

George Washington was declared a "traitor" by the British Crown and Government.
George Washington is considered the "Father of his country" by properly educated USA citizens.

See any correlation?

As a USA citizen (at least until this is posted), the younger Mr. Snowden did us a favor. The display of the Federal Government's illegalities and corruption is always a good thing. Without Mr. Snowden's release of this evidence of illegal activity, we would suspect the Federal Government's unconstitutional and illegal activities. With this evidence, we now know of the corruption, illegalities and immorality of the USA Federal Government and its Directors.

Thank God for Pvt. Manning and Mr. Snowden.
Regrettably, whistleblowing always (and everywhere) carries a heavy price for the whistleblower.

Re:Snowden is a Patriot--his Dad

[mjr167]

The difference between patriotism and treason has always depended on which side wins.

How did he photocopy it?

[OzPeter]

Did he use a Xerox photocopier?

And if so, after looking at the copies he made did Barack later confront Michelle over discrepancies between things that she told Barack, vs what he read he read in said copies? Or did he convene a secret panel that just charged, convicted and sentenced her (queue drone strike), without her getting a chance to defend herself?

(man .. I was going for funny, so how the hell did I end up in such a dark place?)

A better analogy

[Pollux]

This is like when the NSA illegally spies on US citizens.

My point: some things don't need an analogy. This is one of them.

If I were to give it an analogy, I believe this would be the most fitting...

The NSA's surveillance program is like Soylent Green. Both are just so, so wrong.

Re:Who cares?

[Sique]

If telling the truth about illegal activities is treason, I wonder what lying to the American public is in your book.

We don't need an analogy at all.

[rolfwind]

Analogies are valuable teaching tool to visual complex mechanisms by relating them to a hopefully familiar form. This situation needs none. It's not very complex and everyone who reads up on it should know what's going one. In this case, the analogy ceases to be a teaching tool in this instance but a propaganda weapon in how it is cast. And worse than that, it's a propaganda weapon on the 4th grade level. If that is the average level of the electorate, forget about having a democracy or a democratic republic.

Re:We don't need an analogy at all.

[Thanshin]

And worse than that, it's a propaganda weapon on the 4th grade level. If that is the average level of the electorate, forget about having a democracy or a democratic republic.

That is the average level of the electorate.

Democracy is still better than dictatorship, even when the population is composed of uneducated monkeys.

If you have a suggestion of a better system to govern masses of retards, please do present it. For an educated minority, pushing to reach it will be easier than educating the masses.

Re:Who cares?

[coinreturn]

If telling the truth about illegal activities is treason, I wonder what lying to the American public is in your book.

Unfortunately, it's called "The American Way" and is steeped in a very long tradition.

Re:Who cares?

[Sique]

Heroes do not renounce their citizenship and seek asylum amongst foreign intelligence communities.

Heroes do. It's called asylum. And it's considered a human right.

Thoughtful fact-based debate?

[Ioldanach]

"I called for a thorough review of our surveillance operations before Mr. Snowden made these leaks. My preference - and I think the American people's preference - would have been for a lawful, orderly examination of these laws; a thoughtful, fact-based debate." - Obama

Mr. President, how are we supposed to have a thoughtful, fact based debate about programs which are so secret nobody knew about them until a whistle blower revealed them directly to the public. About a court who's orders are so secret that entire companies shut down when the thread of an order looms, and they can't even say what the threat was.

Without transparency, there can be no debate. Without Snowden, there would be no transparency on this issue.

Re:Email is like sending a postcard

[vux984]

The closest physical analogy to sending an (unencrypted) email is sending a post card.

No. The closest analogy to sending an unencrypted email is making a regular phone call.

As a society we do have the expectation that the phone call is private, and that others aren't listening in. We know that its very possible for the carrier to tap a line though, should they choose to do so, or be ordered to so by the government. That is why we have laws requiring them to get a warrant.

And when I make a phone call, I do have an expectation of privacy. Not an absolute guarantee, but an expectation.

I have an expectation that unless someones has a very good reason to be listening to my phone calls, and that someone got a judge to agree to a warrant based on that reason, then there should be nobody listening into the call.

This should not be considered 'naive'.

. If you wouldn't send the information on a post card you probably shouldn't send it on an email either.

I wouldn't send my credit card information on a post card, but I order things over the phone regularly.

Email in general has rather little in the way of privacy rights and until it does have such legal backing you should behave accordingly.

Pretty much this. But the problem is that people rightfully expect email to be treated like a phone call. And instead legally its treated with less respect than a post card.

This represents a massive failure of congress. They are supposed to represent us. They know what we want. They just don't care.