

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Following the news on Wednesday that Pope Francis was selected Time's person of the year despite speculation and, for some, hopes that NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden was the top pick, critics from around the world are blasting the magazine for snubbing Snowden in favor of the less controversial choice.
The former Guardian journalist who has worked closely with Snowden to break the leaks, Glenn Greenwald, tweeted Wednesday:
To some, the nomination for the award, which goes to the person who had the most influence on the news throughout the year, should have clearly gone to Snowden, whose NSA leaks to the mainstream press sent shock-waves around the world and continue to produce major headlines on an almost daily basis.
As the Huffington Post reports:
Snowden was undeniably a figure of major consequence during the year, as Time itself acknowledged in its piece on him. In the months since the Guardian published the first round of revelations from the documents Snowden leaked, newspapers and websites in countries around the world have run article after article detailing the stunning breadth and depth of the global surveillance networks tracking the movements of seemingly everyone on the globe.
Pope Francis, on many counts, has also had a widespread effect on the world since his selection in March. As the first pope from South America, Time claims he has changed the perception of the church and has pressed for "compassion over condemnation in dealing with touchy topics like abortion, gays and contraception," as the Associated Press summarizes. The Pope has also spoken out against inequality and the global socioeconomic system that "is unjust at its root."
Nonetheless, critics argue Snowden has had a far wider role in world news this year.
Peterson continues in a blog post at the Washington Post:
To some, including the politicians who have termed him a "traitor," Snowden is a controversial figure. To others, including the over 140,000 people who signed a (yet unanswered) White House petition calling for him to be pardoned, he's a "national hero." But Time's person of the year isn't supposed to be a popularity contest: Previous selections include Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, and Ayatollah Khomeini. That's why we here at The Switch are naming Snowden our "Person of the Year."
By leaking details about the clandestine programs in use by the NSA and its surveillance partners around the world, Snowden has ignited a fierce debate about the meaning of civil liberties in the 21st century in the United States and abroad. In story after story, the public is learning the true breadth of digital surveillance permeating the Internet age.
In a blog posted Wednesday titled "In Naming Its Man of the Year, Time Proves It Doesn't Even READ the News" journalist and political commentator Marcy Wheeler notes that while Pope Francis is not a bad choice, Time's decision may actually stem from "either fear or ignorance about what Snowden actually revealed," in which she claims the magazine downplays the vast scope of NSA surveillance revealed by Snowden in its write-up of him.
Wheeler writes:
But reading the profile Time did of Snowden, I can't help but suspect they picked the Pope out of either fear or ignorance about what Snowden actually revealed. Consider this paragraph, which introduces a section on the lies NSA has told:
"The NSA, for its part, has always prided itself on being different from the intelligence services of authoritarian regimes, and it has long collected far less information on Americans than it could..."
It's full of bullshit. There's the claim that NSA collects far less on Americans than it could. Does that account for the fact that, in the Internet dragnet and upstream collection programs, it collected far more than it was authorized to?
The Huffington Post also collected a series of Tweets similarly blasting the decision.
_______________________
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Following the news on Wednesday that Pope Francis was selected Time's person of the year despite speculation and, for some, hopes that NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden was the top pick, critics from around the world are blasting the magazine for snubbing Snowden in favor of the less controversial choice.
The former Guardian journalist who has worked closely with Snowden to break the leaks, Glenn Greenwald, tweeted Wednesday:
To some, the nomination for the award, which goes to the person who had the most influence on the news throughout the year, should have clearly gone to Snowden, whose NSA leaks to the mainstream press sent shock-waves around the world and continue to produce major headlines on an almost daily basis.
As the Huffington Post reports:
Snowden was undeniably a figure of major consequence during the year, as Time itself acknowledged in its piece on him. In the months since the Guardian published the first round of revelations from the documents Snowden leaked, newspapers and websites in countries around the world have run article after article detailing the stunning breadth and depth of the global surveillance networks tracking the movements of seemingly everyone on the globe.
Pope Francis, on many counts, has also had a widespread effect on the world since his selection in March. As the first pope from South America, Time claims he has changed the perception of the church and has pressed for "compassion over condemnation in dealing with touchy topics like abortion, gays and contraception," as the Associated Press summarizes. The Pope has also spoken out against inequality and the global socioeconomic system that "is unjust at its root."
Nonetheless, critics argue Snowden has had a far wider role in world news this year.
Peterson continues in a blog post at the Washington Post:
To some, including the politicians who have termed him a "traitor," Snowden is a controversial figure. To others, including the over 140,000 people who signed a (yet unanswered) White House petition calling for him to be pardoned, he's a "national hero." But Time's person of the year isn't supposed to be a popularity contest: Previous selections include Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, and Ayatollah Khomeini. That's why we here at The Switch are naming Snowden our "Person of the Year."
By leaking details about the clandestine programs in use by the NSA and its surveillance partners around the world, Snowden has ignited a fierce debate about the meaning of civil liberties in the 21st century in the United States and abroad. In story after story, the public is learning the true breadth of digital surveillance permeating the Internet age.
In a blog posted Wednesday titled "In Naming Its Man of the Year, Time Proves It Doesn't Even READ the News" journalist and political commentator Marcy Wheeler notes that while Pope Francis is not a bad choice, Time's decision may actually stem from "either fear or ignorance about what Snowden actually revealed," in which she claims the magazine downplays the vast scope of NSA surveillance revealed by Snowden in its write-up of him.
Wheeler writes:
But reading the profile Time did of Snowden, I can't help but suspect they picked the Pope out of either fear or ignorance about what Snowden actually revealed. Consider this paragraph, which introduces a section on the lies NSA has told:
"The NSA, for its part, has always prided itself on being different from the intelligence services of authoritarian regimes, and it has long collected far less information on Americans than it could..."
It's full of bullshit. There's the claim that NSA collects far less on Americans than it could. Does that account for the fact that, in the Internet dragnet and upstream collection programs, it collected far more than it was authorized to?
The Huffington Post also collected a series of Tweets similarly blasting the decision.
_______________________
Following the news on Wednesday that Pope Francis was selected Time's person of the year despite speculation and, for some, hopes that NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden was the top pick, critics from around the world are blasting the magazine for snubbing Snowden in favor of the less controversial choice.
The former Guardian journalist who has worked closely with Snowden to break the leaks, Glenn Greenwald, tweeted Wednesday:
To some, the nomination for the award, which goes to the person who had the most influence on the news throughout the year, should have clearly gone to Snowden, whose NSA leaks to the mainstream press sent shock-waves around the world and continue to produce major headlines on an almost daily basis.
As the Huffington Post reports:
Snowden was undeniably a figure of major consequence during the year, as Time itself acknowledged in its piece on him. In the months since the Guardian published the first round of revelations from the documents Snowden leaked, newspapers and websites in countries around the world have run article after article detailing the stunning breadth and depth of the global surveillance networks tracking the movements of seemingly everyone on the globe.
Pope Francis, on many counts, has also had a widespread effect on the world since his selection in March. As the first pope from South America, Time claims he has changed the perception of the church and has pressed for "compassion over condemnation in dealing with touchy topics like abortion, gays and contraception," as the Associated Press summarizes. The Pope has also spoken out against inequality and the global socioeconomic system that "is unjust at its root."
Nonetheless, critics argue Snowden has had a far wider role in world news this year.
Peterson continues in a blog post at the Washington Post:
To some, including the politicians who have termed him a "traitor," Snowden is a controversial figure. To others, including the over 140,000 people who signed a (yet unanswered) White House petition calling for him to be pardoned, he's a "national hero." But Time's person of the year isn't supposed to be a popularity contest: Previous selections include Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, and Ayatollah Khomeini. That's why we here at The Switch are naming Snowden our "Person of the Year."
By leaking details about the clandestine programs in use by the NSA and its surveillance partners around the world, Snowden has ignited a fierce debate about the meaning of civil liberties in the 21st century in the United States and abroad. In story after story, the public is learning the true breadth of digital surveillance permeating the Internet age.
In a blog posted Wednesday titled "In Naming Its Man of the Year, Time Proves It Doesn't Even READ the News" journalist and political commentator Marcy Wheeler notes that while Pope Francis is not a bad choice, Time's decision may actually stem from "either fear or ignorance about what Snowden actually revealed," in which she claims the magazine downplays the vast scope of NSA surveillance revealed by Snowden in its write-up of him.
Wheeler writes:
But reading the profile Time did of Snowden, I can't help but suspect they picked the Pope out of either fear or ignorance about what Snowden actually revealed. Consider this paragraph, which introduces a section on the lies NSA has told:
"The NSA, for its part, has always prided itself on being different from the intelligence services of authoritarian regimes, and it has long collected far less information on Americans than it could..."
It's full of bullshit. There's the claim that NSA collects far less on Americans than it could. Does that account for the fact that, in the Internet dragnet and upstream collection programs, it collected far more than it was authorized to?
The Huffington Post also collected a series of Tweets similarly blasting the decision.
_______________________