Selectively Living (Part II)
I thought that maybe I was over-reacting in the previous writing. So I just thought I would try again. The first article I come accross is called "GOP Senators propose NSA spying bill". Here we go again...
Wow! We're spying? On who? How evil? Damn those Republicans!
My first thought was that a Democrat wrote this article. But, there is no author listed. Just from CNN. I guess the idea is to portray the word "spying" to make it seem bad or harsh?
Yet no where in the article does the word "spying" appear. In fact, the bill refers to the program that is labeled "domestic surveillance program". It is not called "domestic spying program".
So why label it that way in the headline? So someone will click on it? To keep your job because you have "catchy" headlines? Because you are a Democrat and want to label the Bush Administration as a bunch of shotgun spies? (Okay, maybe I shouldn't have used the word shotgun) I have gotten to the point now where everything I read, see, hear, etc...I try to weed through the facade and peel back what is really there. (btw...the UAE Port Deal is a good example)
I guess we just have to be careful out there on how to interpret things a complex world. Another way to say it...we have to be able to see throught the big pile of shit out there.
Wow! We're spying? On who? How evil? Damn those Republicans!
My first thought was that a Democrat wrote this article. But, there is no author listed. Just from CNN. I guess the idea is to portray the word "spying" to make it seem bad or harsh?
Yet no where in the article does the word "spying" appear. In fact, the bill refers to the program that is labeled "domestic surveillance program". It is not called "domestic spying program".
So why label it that way in the headline? So someone will click on it? To keep your job because you have "catchy" headlines? Because you are a Democrat and want to label the Bush Administration as a bunch of shotgun spies? (Okay, maybe I shouldn't have used the word shotgun) I have gotten to the point now where everything I read, see, hear, etc...I try to weed through the facade and peel back what is really there. (btw...the UAE Port Deal is a good example)
I guess we just have to be careful out there on how to interpret things a complex world. Another way to say it...we have to be able to see throught the big pile of shit out there.
4 Comments:
In case anyone is interested...here is the article:
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/03/07/eavesdropping/index.html
That paste of the link didn't really come out right...oh well. I did notice though that the link had the word eavesdropping in it.
So we went from surveillance...to spying...to eavesdropping! Choose those words carefully.
Surveillance means: Close observation of a person or group, especially one under suspicion.
Spying means: An agent employed by a state to obtain secret information, especially of a military nature, concerning its potential or actual enemies.
OR
One employed by a company to obtain confidential information about its competitors.
OR
One who secretly keeps watch on another or others.
Eavesdropping means: to listen secretly to what is being said in private without the consent of the speaker
So which sounds better or worse? Evil or good?
Check this out (first sentence in NY Times article--notice they changed the "administration's domestic surveillance program" to the "administration's domestic eavesdropping program):
New York Times
March 8, 2006
Pg. 1
G.O.P. Senators Say Accord Is Set On Wiretapping
By David D. Kirkpatrick and Scott Shane
WASHINGTON, March 7 — Moving to tamp down Democratic calls for an investigation of the administration's domestic eavesdropping program, Republicans on the Senate Intelligence Committee said Tuesday that they had reached agreement with the White House on proposed bills to impose new oversight but allow wiretapping without warrants for up to 45 days.
Post a Comment
<< Home