SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/28/us/politics/nsa-surveillance-terrorism-privacy.html
The National Security Agency said Friday that it had halted one of the most disputed practices of its warrantless surveillance program, ending a once-secret form of wiretapping that dates to the Bush administration's post-Sept. 11 expansion of national security powers.
The agency is no longer collecting Americans' emails and texts exchanged with people overseas that simply mention identifying terms — like email addresses — for foreigners whom the agency is spying on, but are neither to nor from those targets.
The decision is a major development in American surveillance policy. Privacy advocates have argued that the practice skirted or overstepped the Fourth Amendment.
The change is unrelated to the surveillance imbroglio over the investigations into Russia and the Trump campaign, according to officials familiar with the matter. Rather, it stemmed from a discovery that N.S.A. analysts had violated rules imposed by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court barring any searching for Americans' information in certain messages captured through such wiretapping.
Though I'm personally wondering why now.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 01 2017, @06:11AM (2 children)
The extreme specificity of what is no longer being collected makes this read very much like a lie by omission. There is also a complete lack of any reason given it. There's also the fact that the NYT is reporting on it. If this were a genuine decision, it seems likely that the only impetus for it would be either an act of congress, or a major legal precedent being set somewhere. I'm aware of neither of these, and the article mentions neither of these. And in either case it would be something the NSA would likely be keen to keep under wraps. Also the tactic being reported is one of the very few I think most people would generally be okay with (though if you think about it, it implies an all encompassing dragnet to begin with). By contrast other things revealed about the NSA surveillance include tactics [theguardian.com] such as the ability to intercept every single domestic conversation (including video) in Skype with aid in undermining Microsoft's encryption, by Microsoft. Why would they get rid of something that actually makes sense, and then report about it to the NYT? I hate to use such a loaded term, but this really looks like propaganda designed to make our increasing surveillance state seem 'less bad.' "Thanks to those people complaining about surveillance, now the NSA can't even grab emails directly talking about the bad guys!"
(Score: 2) by inertnet on Monday May 01 2017, @01:33PM
lie by omission
Not that I believe so myself, but a cynical explanation using the above quote would be: this type of surveillance is now done by a different agency. The news article would not be a lie, but it would omit essential information.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 01 2017, @03:50PM
exactly. and yes, the nyt is just a mouth piece for the intel community/supra national surveillance state.