Tech Musing 3

After watching Part One of the United States of Secrets on Frontline, I was fascinated by the overall depth of the story. While I have always been a proponent for the Constitution and the rights to privacy, I found it interesting to hear about the government’s point of view. Following the attacks on September 11, I can certainly understand how the government would want to do anything they could to prevent another attack. Countless members of the government and the National Security Agency could not help but feel a sense of responsibility for failing to prevent such a large terrorist attack from occurring. Thus, I do not find it to be all that surprising that the government would want to push the boundary as far as they possibly could by eliminating the algorithms on the Thinthread project protecting domestic citizens’ private information.

What I was surprised by, however, was the way that the United States government treated its own current and former employees in its efforts to find the person who leaked information to the New York Times. In particular, I was shocked to see how Thomas Drake was treated. The fact that he released unclassified documents to the press and then was charged with a felony later is absurd. I thought it was very strange how they crossed out the “unclassified” part of the document and then labeled “classified,” after Drake released them to the media. It is pretty scary that this man could have spent his entire life in prison when he really did nothing wrong.

Another thing that I thought was interesting was how most of the surveillance programs remained intact even after Barack Obama replaced George W. Bush in office. Even though Obama had campaigned and claimed to end secrecy and embrace transparency, once he actually was elected into office, he realized that these programs could potentially help the country prevent terrorist threats. I probably would have done the same thing if I were Obama because it would be foolish to give up the power that comes with additional information.

However, as a citizen of the United States, my knowledge of the country’s ability to collect private information at will has made me skeptical of what they are really doing with it all. United States citizens have a right to privacy and I don’t want the federal government to violate that right. Even if the government was not collecting electronic data from phones and online communications, I know that it is unwise to send confidential information electronically. Hackers can find ways to access this information themselves, so I feel more threatened by outside hackers than I do by the government. Still, the possibility that the government is moving closer and closer to becoming more like Big Brother is concerning. Hearing about the government’s massive surveillance programs has made me become much more cautious with my phone and online activity.

Currently, I have not made a concrete determination of what I think about Edward Snowden. Admittedly, I do not know very much concerning him other than the fact that he considers himself a whistleblower and that he leaked classified documents to the press concerning the country’s surveillance techniques and programs. I know that the government, including President Obama, considers him to be a traitor. My father, who works with the government, shares a similar view and tells me that he put many lives at risk and helped our enemies by bringing to light our surveillance techniques, which will help terrorists adjust accordingly. I understand this point of view, but I also understand the point of view of those that support what Snowden did. If Snowden’s motives truly were to be a whistleblower and protect the Constitution, then perhaps what he did should be admired. Nevertheless, I will continue to read up on the subject to gather more information and I plan on watching Part Two of the documentary as well to further educate myself.