Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
Security Privacy Politics Your Rights Online

The CIA Does Las Vegas 124

Nicola Hahn (1482985) writes Despite the long line of covert operations that Ed Snowden's documents have exposed, public outcry hasn't come anywhere near the level of social unrest that characterized the 1960s. Journalists like Conor Friedersdorf have suggested that one explanation for this is that the public is "informed by a press that treats officials who get caught lying and misleading (e.g., James Clapper and Keith Alexander) as if they're credible."

Certainly there are a number of well-known popular venues which offer a stage for spies to broadcast their messages from while simultaneously claiming to "cultivate conversations among all members of the security community, both public and private." This year, for instance, Black Hat USA will host Dan Greer (the CISO of In-Q-Tel) as a keynote speaker.

But after all of the lies and subterfuge is it even constructive to give voice to the talking points of intelligence officials? Or are they just muddying the water? As one observer put it, "high-profile members of the intelligence community like Cofer Black, Shawn Henry, Keith Alexander, and Dan Greer are positioned front and center in keynote slots, as if they were glamorous Hollywood celebrities. While those who value their civil liberties might opine that they should more aptly be treated like pariahs."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

The CIA Does Las Vegas

Comments Filter:
  • Re:Ridiculous (Score:5, Informative)

    by kilfarsnar ( 561956 ) on Friday August 01, 2014 @09:46AM (#47580905)

    Journalists like Conor Friedersdorf have suggested that one explanation for this is that the public is "informed by a press

    Balderdash. There is not a press. What is this, communism, comrade? We have many presses. The problem is that the public follows the sensational ones instead of the informative. We The People have the government, and thus the press, which we deserve.

    But when they're owned by 5 media companies, all of which are in turn owned by rich media barons, they tend to walk the party line. Remember when Phil Donohue was fired for being against the Iraq war, and couldn't get a job anywhere else? That wouldn't happen if the various media were really independent.

  • Re:Ridiculous (Score:2, Informative)

    by s.petry ( 762400 ) on Friday August 01, 2014 @10:38AM (#47581285)

    There is not a press. What is this, communism, comrade?

    You have not paid any attention to what's been happening with media in the US have you? Broadcast and Print media is all primarily owned by the same people. If talking points are not followed journalists are fired. I have no idea how you missed the leaks about the New York Post, CNN, FOX, and *NBC, and hell even the AP. A few of these leaks were even mentioned in some places (though not covered as stories or discussed beyond the mention). Each outlet is controlling output and following administration provided talking points. Having to have stories approved by 3 letter government agencies before running them, and blacking out content that could harm the administration provided talking points.

    It's not "communism", that's a false paradigm. Seems like you also missed the reports that the US has turned into a fascist oligarch by a couple large universities. Having a controlled media is surely a sign of a society that is not free, but communism is not the only form of government that is "not free".

"Conversion, fastidious Goddess, loves blood better than brick, and feasts most subtly on the human will." -- Virginia Woolf, "Mrs. Dalloway"