This is a thoughtful analysis/confession by @BuzzFeedBen. I worried back when Politico and its cohort were ascending that obsessive, junky coverage wasn't good for politics or for journalism. I'm a little surprised it took others so long to see that. https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/bensmith/i-helped-create-insider-political-journalism-now-its-time …
Good pieces explaining the national security architecture of the US. In the mainstream press. Unless you're an uber-nerd (say read lawfare et al), there were few ways to understand what FISA, 702 etc is before recent turmoil.
-
-
Excellent point. There was a more of this coverage back in 2005-06, and then again following the Snowden revelations, but we haven't kept up with it for our readers.
-
Yea. I think it's a bit "unfair" that news orgs have to explain the larger architecture, but given the pace of development school time education wouldn't help much even if it were good. (And I personally might just not have been appreciative of the balances of issues at ~14)
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Even during the last 702 reauth there was little coverage explaining the bigger picture. Either it was "politician X wants Y, Z wavers", or policy details, but very little explaining the actual architecture.
-
How should a normal interested, but with a life, person understand that there's safeguards, but also actual weaknesses?
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.