Freedom vs. privacy II
By The Tribune-Review
Published: Saturday, June 22, 2013, 9:00 p.m.
Regarding the current revelations about government “snooping”: Questions are being asked, perhaps late in the game, but better late than never. The NSA and other agencies might have used their powers abusively, perhaps not.
All the while, no questions are posed about the fact of corporate, private-sector abuse of individuals and their data via collection, trading, selling and generally sloppy handling thereof, which is clearly abusive. “Opt out” provisions, buried in corporate “mouse print,” do not mitigate the abusive nature of corporate practices either, notwithstanding the public's seeming willingness to give up valued privacy in pursuit of miniscule rewards offered.
Strikes me that the priorities of complainers, in and out of Congress and elsewhere, too, are seriously out of whack, but that's just what I think.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Lebo’s coyotes
- Beneficial, irreplaceable
- Saved her life
- About U.S. media
- Wildlife & humans
- Economic drivel
- Fix icy hazard on Rt. 66
- We pay to keep poor warm
- Conspicuous by absence
- Corbett’s budget claim
- Apollo-Ridge excellence