There's a meme on Reddit that revolves around 'so brave': basically calling people/posts/comments out for obvious pandering.
This reads like a pastiche of Keith Olbermann, all bravado and empty gusto. Arrington writes:
What has these people, among the wealthiest on the planet, so scared that they find themselves engaging in these verbal gymnastics to avoid telling a simple truth?
and then acknowledges that doing so, if it meant breaking FISA, is illegal.
Because their lawyers might be telling them what they are required to do. But their soul should be telling them what they must do.
What the hell does this even mean?
Listen, I completely agree with the central premise that we need to have an actual conversation both about privacy in the age of Facebook and the Kafka-esque way the U.S. government has engineered these catch-22 gag orders. But given Arrington's experience both with AOL and with the overall notion of privacy, I'd expect something with a little more substance and perspective.
This reads like a pastiche of Keith Olbermann, all bravado and empty gusto. Arrington writes:
What has these people, among the wealthiest on the planet, so scared that they find themselves engaging in these verbal gymnastics to avoid telling a simple truth?
and then acknowledges that doing so, if it meant breaking FISA, is illegal.
Because their lawyers might be telling them what they are required to do. But their soul should be telling them what they must do.
What the hell does this even mean?
Listen, I completely agree with the central premise that we need to have an actual conversation both about privacy in the age of Facebook and the Kafka-esque way the U.S. government has engineered these catch-22 gag orders. But given Arrington's experience both with AOL and with the overall notion of privacy, I'd expect something with a little more substance and perspective.