PRISM: Why the “directly and unilaterally” mistake matters.
My post about how a central claim of the PRISM story turns out not to be true has drawn a wide range of comments. There's one particular kind of comment I'd like to address here: the idea that, even if what I said was true, it was a mere technical detail and is not important in the larger story. (Here's one such response.)
If the original claim about PRISM had been true, it would have had major implications for how we understand power and the nature of our political world.
The idea that the importance of a fact (or an...