I’ve started reading Glenn Greenwald’s No Place To Hide: Edward Snowden, The NSA, and the U.S. Surveillance State and at the top of page 19 I stopped, realizing that what Greenwald had written about the central fear of Edward Snowden was precisely the very real fear I had about the ongoing revelations. Greenwald wrote:
Despite the near-certain costs of outing himself–a lengthy prison term if not worse–he was, [Edward Snowden] said again and again, “at peace” with those consequences. “I only have one fear in doing all of this,” he said, which is “that people will see these documents and shrug, that they’ll say, ‘we assumed this was happening and don’t care.’ The only thing I’m worried about is that I’ll do all this to my life for nothing.”
“I seriously doubt that will happen,” I assured him, but I wasn’t convinced I really believed that. I knew from my years of writing about NSA abuses that it can be hard to generate serious concern about secret state surveillance: invasion of privacy and abuse of power can be viewed as abstractions, ones that are difficult to get people to care about viscerally.
This struck me because of what I had read yesterday concerning the Stephen Colbert interview with Glenn Greenwald aired on Monday. In that interview, Greenwald said:
One of the missing pieces is about who are the people on whom the NSA is spying on in America, who are they targeting, for what purposes, who are these people that they are declaring to be sufficient threats that it warrants reading their emails and what is the pattern of people that they have targeted. Are they political dissidents, are they critics of US foreign policy, or are they actual terrorists?”
Could there be enough names on that list, or at least enough important names, to counteract the shrug factor?
I hope so, but I am skeptical.