Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×
United States Stats

Except For Millennials, Most Americans Dislike Snowden 686

HughPickens.com writes: Newsmax reports that according to KRC Research, about 64 percent of Americans familiar with Snowden hold a negative opinion of him. However 56 percent of Americans between the ages of 18 and 34 have a positive opinion of Snowden which contrasts sharply with older age cohorts. Among those aged 35-44, some 34 percent have positive attitudes toward him. For the 45-54 age cohort, the figure is 28 percent, and it drops to 26 percent among Americans over age 55, U.S. News reported. Americans overall say by plurality that Snowden has done "more to hurt" U.S. national security (43 percent) than help it (20 percent). A similar breakdown was seen with views on whether Snowden helped or hurt efforts to combat terrorism, though the numbers flip on whether his actions will lead to greater privacy protections. "The broad support for Edward Snowden among Millennials around the world should be a message to democratic countries that change is coming," says Anthony D. Romero, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union. "They are a generation of digital natives who don't want government agencies tracking them online or collecting data about their phone calls." Opinions of millennials are particularly significant in light of January 2015 findings by the U.S. Census Bureau that they are projected to surpass the baby-boom generation as the United States' largest living generation this year.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Except For Millennials, Most Americans Dislike Snowden

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 23, 2015 @07:04AM (#49535371)

    If you rule out everyone who thinks Snowden's a pretty cool guy, you still can't make it to "all Americans hate Snowden"?

    Keep grasping for them straws, brownshirts.

    • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 23, 2015 @08:23AM (#49536011)

      I'm 64 and I like Snowden.
      I don't know if he's a snob, an asshat, a jerk or a nice guy and I don't care.
      What he did was a great service to the population and citizenry of the USA.

      I love my country, America, but I fear my Government.

      These frakking polls are bovine scat.

      • by JimFive ( 1064958 ) on Thursday April 23, 2015 @10:22AM (#49537263)
        I agree. I can believe that Snowden's revelations hurt National Security and anti-terrorism and ALSO believe that what he did was a great service to the country. Unless they specifically asked something like, "Do you support Snowden's actions?" then I don't think you get a good sense of what people think about him.
        --
        JimFive
      • by Ravaldy ( 2621787 ) on Thursday April 23, 2015 @10:29AM (#49537351)

        I like what you wrote because I feel the same way. I think he provided a great service to the whole world.

        I'd also be curious how many of the millennials would hire him to work in their business. I bet the % would be significantly lower and I wouldn't blame them.

        I'm curious if the older generation would think more of Snowden if he faced the music after releasing the information? After all, heroes of the people have either suffered or even died for their cause to be recognized.

      • by HBI ( 604924 ) on Thursday April 23, 2015 @10:51AM (#49537553) Journal

        46 here. I work in the military-industrial complex. Snowden did us all a signal service.

        Think about the limitations of the general public in perceiving this. Do you really think that people who think Kim Kardashian is interesting and like the NFL are really going to give this any serious thought? They'll parrot the line the government throws out.

        The interesting part of the poll is that even a tiny percentage think that Snowden did the right thing. Not enough to give me much hope, but enough to surprise me.

        • by PeeAitchPee ( 712652 ) on Thursday April 23, 2015 @12:53PM (#49538907)

          Do you really think that people who think Kim Kardashian is interesting and like the NFL are really going to give this any serious thought?

          Whoa . . . don't conflate the enjoyment of professional sports with contrived, superficial, reality TV bullshit. There are plenty of us geeks out there who follow both the NFL closely (the draft is a week from tonight and I'm hoping my team lands Bud Dupree!) *and* are interested and aware enough to carefully analyze what Snowden did and form our own opinions. :-)

    • by RyuuzakiTetsuya ( 195424 ) <<taiki> <at> <cox.net>> on Thursday April 23, 2015 @09:35AM (#49536757)

      I have a nuanced opinion about Edward Snowden. I think he's a patriot who may or may not have compromised national security but I also don't know if that's a bad thing or not.

      I do have a very low negative opinion of people who make Nazi allusions because of complex international security and policing issues.

      • by spire3661 ( 1038968 ) on Thursday April 23, 2015 @10:47AM (#49537505) Journal
        My feeling is this, our government has compromised national security by acting in ways that are blatantly wrong. IF the government wasnt involved in incredibly dubious shit, i would be more sympathetic. The fact is our government is frantically trying to be able to tap everything, and that needed to be exposed.
        • by RyuuzakiTetsuya ( 195424 ) <<taiki> <at> <cox.net>> on Thursday April 23, 2015 @01:23PM (#49539227)

          I'm partially sympathetic to the Government. The Government isn't a monolithic entity where they're all marching lock step towards the same totalitarian goal.

          No, it's worse than that, in that we have some parts being turned into agencies and departments that no one wants to reign in because heaven forbid someone put a check on law enforcement power, lest you be considered to be "weak on crime" or "weak on national defense." It's why we still have outdated ideas about incarceration and justice despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary that this shit doesn't work. No one wants to be told prisons don't work, they just want the safety and security illusions of having a prison system. Once they're told that the whole system is broken the illusion of safety is gone.

          That's harder to fight. If there was a conspiracy or a tyrant running the NSA doing awful things, it's easy to point that out and say, "Hey, get them! They're the problem." When the problem is more endemic and harder to check than just saying, "The Government is spying on it's citizens and that's bad for a whole host of obvious reasons."

          We aren't in an age where the Stasi-like agents are stopping cars asking for papers, but the transition from there to here would be gradual. It's a ... not slippery? Slightly moist and lightly more lubricious than average slope to a terrifying police state no one but the most ardent control freak wants but we wound up with any way because of partisan electoral politicking.

          I don't think that Park Services is tapping your phone line and I don't think that DOT and DOE are interested in your private conversations, unless you're out to burn down a forest or school or rest stop.

          Even then, that's an FBI matter.

          teal dear:

          I do still trust the Government, but with a whole lot of caveats.

    • Roughly two thirds of the people surveyed in the US have an opinion (or even recognize the name). You need to drill into the original survey to find that number.

      Of the people who have an opinion, in the usual demographic breakouts only the 18 to 34 y/o group tends to have a positive opinion of him.

    • by Austerity Empowers ( 669817 ) on Thursday April 23, 2015 @10:17AM (#49537209)

      I think you can have a negative opinion of him but think he did the right thing, also. I don't think he did the best possible thing, I don't think he tried very hard, I think he was angry, didn't get the response he wanted from the right people quickly enough and acted brashly. I think he could have done more to protect secrets that need to stay secrets (because lives are on the line), while also revealing how incredibly bad our government was acting. But what he did was still better than keeping quiet.

      I also suspect that the older you are, the more foreign enemies scare you than domestic ones. That's not a statement that indicates the older crowd is correct in their fears either, if anything the foreign enemy threat is in fact somewhat lower, but the domestic enemy threat has grown tremendously in the past 40 years. Just look at the people funding the republican party? I cannot imagine a scarier group of people with a more frightening ideology.

  • Doublethink (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Totenglocke ( 1291680 ) on Thursday April 23, 2015 @07:06AM (#49535377)
    That's because the elderly suffered much more stringent brainwashing as children that leads them to say that they "support those who fight for our freedom" while also promoting a police state worse than Orwells worst nightmare. The younger crowd grew up with much more access to information and see the police state for what it is and do not have the blind worship of government that the elderly do.
    • Re:Doublethink (Score:5, Insightful)

      by geekmux ( 1040042 ) on Thursday April 23, 2015 @07:31AM (#49535559)

      That's because the elderly suffered much more stringent brainwashing as children that leads them to say that they "support those who fight for our freedom" while also promoting a police state worse than Orwells worst nightmare. The younger crowd grew up with much more access to information and see the police state for what it is and do not have the blind worship of government that the elderly do.

      I wonder how those elderly will feel as their Social Security and Medicare programs are stripped clean in order to pay for that police state they champion so much...

      This isn't just about information. Cost is a huge factor too, and perhaps felt a hell of a lot more with the younger generation who is still paying the full brunt of those "terror" taxes.

      • Re:Doublethink (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Tim the Gecko ( 745081 ) on Thursday April 23, 2015 @07:53AM (#49535763)

        I wonder how those elderly will feel as their Social Security and Medicare programs are stripped clean in order to pay for that police state they champion so much...

        So the generation that votes wants to maintain Social Security and Medicare, even if it plunges future citizens into debt, and the generation that doesn't vote wants a different policy on Snowden. Which generation do you think politicians would listen to most?

        • The generation who doesn't vote is busy building technology which renders the politicians' mandates increasingly-impossible to enforce.

          By the time that generation is done, it won't matter what the politicians say anymore because math will trump force [nakamotoinstitute.org].

          That's the possibility that should really terrify the Boomers and make them clamour for increased surveillance - the possibility that their grandchildren might have both the means and the desire to avoid paying the payroll taxes which keep the Boomers' monthly

          • The generation who doesn't vote is busy building technology which renders the politicians' mandates increasingly-impossible to enforce.

            By the time that generation is done, it won't matter what the politicians say anymore because math will trump force [nakamotoinstitute.org].

            That's the possibility that should really terrify the Boomers and make them clamour for increased surveillance - the possibility that their grandchildren might have both the means and the desire to avoid paying the payroll taxes which keep the Boomers' monthly checks flowing.

            It's funny we sit here and talk about the environment and what are we doing to secure the planet and natural resources for future generations as you spitball about future generations literally being sabotaged by the younger generation.

            I only have one thing to say to that. Better fucking hope the youth of today discovers immortality.. Funny how they've have forgotten they will get old one day too, and get screwed over by their own policies.

            I'm certainly not saying the current system is perfect, but shortsig

            • Funny how they've have forgotten they will get old one day too, and get screwed over by their own policies.

              The will rediscover the value of personal savings, and won't rely on a Ponzi scheme for their retirement plan.

        • by houghi ( 78078 )

          The ones that gives them the most money. This means neither of the two you were talking about.

        • by judoguy ( 534886 )
          Since we are listing age here... I'm 61 and I'm FAR more afraid of my own government than terrorists or other nations. I do believe we need intelligence services, a strong military, etc., but not at the cost of establishing a totalitarian police state in the U.S.

          Oops! Too late, I suppose that boat has already sailed. A secure country doesn't need to be a police state. That's a fact.

    • Re:Doublethink (Score:5, Insightful)

      by IamTheRealMike ( 537420 ) on Thursday April 23, 2015 @07:31AM (#49535567)

      I think it's more likely to be because people under 35 are the first generation that have no memory of the cold war. People born before about 1980 lived in a world where there was a very strong, clear delineation between us vs them and that divide was seen as an existential struggle between good and evil. Merely by being born into a certain country, you too could take part in an epic ideological struggle between right and wrong. It is perhaps not surprising that people who lived most of their life in such a world instinctively support a strong, authoritarian state and react badly to a "traitor who gave our national security secrets to the Russians" or whatever garbled version of the story they received via Fox News. There's definitely a clear and strong tendency in older populations to support our side regardless of what that side actually does, and things that seem to bring back old certainties strongly appeal to them. Hence the desperate need of the establishment to make "the terrorists" to new Big Evil.

      Contrast to people under the age of 35 who don't remember the cold war and have never lived in a world where there were clearly defined conflicts between us/them or good/evil. Instead there has been a series of endless wars started by us against dramatically weaker foes, based on vague and uncompelling justifications, the results of which have mostly been bedlam. Older people love this because it's an attempt to bring back the old certainties they remember. It leaves young people cold because they don't care about the old certainties, as they never had them to begin with.

      Combine all this with the fact that the average software developer is 30 years old [stackoverflow.com] and the average age of Congress is 57 [slate.com] ... nearly double their age .... you have set the stage for an epic showdown between the technology industry and the political establishment. Which is exactly what's happening.

      • Re:Doublethink (Score:5, Insightful)

        by meta-monkey ( 321000 ) on Thursday April 23, 2015 @08:21AM (#49535997) Journal

        Astute observations.

        And yes, the battle will be between the tech industry + users vs the political establishment.

        The "young people don't vote!" thing is a red herring. Especially this generation, I absolutely believe they would vote, if there were anybody to vote for. They got burned with Obama, and do you think either the R or D candidate in 2016 is going to have "end government surveillance" as part of their platform? Absolutely not.

        • The "young people don't vote!" thing is a red herring.

          Statistics would disagree. It's always been this way - younger people tend to care less about voting. My theory is at that age you're still so engrossed with exploring your environment, that you put little thought into shaping your environment.

          • Re:Doublethink (Score:4, Insightful)

            by IamTheRealMike ( 537420 ) on Thursday April 23, 2015 @11:23AM (#49537875)

            It's always been this way - younger people tend to care less about voting

            I could equally say it's always been this way because politicians and The Establishment have always been old.

            My theory is at that age you're still so engrossed with exploring your environment, that you put little thought into shaping your environment.

            My theory is that political parties run by older people tend to focus on the wishes of people just like them i.e. older people. Due to the party political whipping system, young people who investigate politics quickly realise they will be forced to vote in support of social policies they disagree with, making the career unattractive. This results in a downward spiral in which politicians ignore people unlike them, those people get turned off from politics, and thus the demographic makeup of the political elite can never self correct.

    • Or, perhaps the young are still naive enough to believe their rage matters?

      "Change is coming" - sure it is. What will change is only that the naive, hopeful young will grow up and recognize that short of actual revolution, nothing is going to substantially change (no matter how many "causes" you "like" on facebook!) and that their energies are better spent just focusing on the things and people that are important to them.

    • That's because the elderly suffered much more stringent brainwashing as children that leads them to say that they "support those who fight for our freedom" while also promoting a police state worse than Orwells worst nightmare. The younger crowd grew up with much more access to information and see the police state for what it is and do not have the blind worship of government that the elderly do.

      What a crock. Ever since myspace came along, every millennial I know has been quick to jump on the next big tracking/social app that comes along. Many older but not "elderly" people won't do that precisely because they are concerned about being tracked. Aside from that, what Snowden did can't be simplified into right or wrong because some people object to the way he did it, e.g. running off to Russia instead of standing on his principles and others object to parts of what he did, such as releasing documents

  • by Anonymous Coward

    It's a nutjob neocon superchristian propaganda rag. More reputable news sources exist (yes, even Fox News is fine for stories like this).

    Thanks.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by CajunArson ( 465943 )

      So you're saying that old people like Snowden and Millenials hate his guts?

      Your summary dismissal of facts based on the source not being politically correct enough shows that you are very enlightened and tolerant.

      During WWII, did your grandpappie tell his bosses to not trust that E=mc^2 crap because the guy who thought it up wasn't an Aryan pure blood?

      • by dave420 ( 699308 )
        You are confusing "politically incorrect" with "factually incorrect". The source is a bad source to draw conclusions from because of its unabashed biases. Ignoring it does not magically imply that the opposite of what it states is the truth. You'd have to be some special kind of nuts to think that...
  • Propaganda Works (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 23, 2015 @07:12AM (#49535405)

    Propaganda Works. Smear someone for long enough, loudly enough, consistently enough, and people will eventually listen and believe. We've seen it happen to Assange, to Snowden, to dozens of other whistleblowers, in politics, in law enforcement, in finance. We've seen it happen to fucking gamers. Over time, a negative media narrative will stick.

    The problem, at its core, is the media. They are not a fourth estate. They are the new First Estate.

    • Re:Propaganda Works (Score:5, Interesting)

      by jythie ( 914043 ) on Thursday April 23, 2015 @07:42AM (#49535655)
      Something I will be curious to see over the next few decades is how propaganda is affected by advertising saturation. Something that has been worrying marketers is that young consumers (ones more accustomed to multitasking and who grew up with heavy advertizing) filter out a larger amount of marketing than other groups. Even as their knowledge and skills improve (ah, the dark uses of all those psych majors), advertising is becoming more difficult and consumers more jaded and less uniform.

      Since propaganda can be seen as a specialized form of marketing, I wonder how that type of manipulation is going to adjust. It used to be that one coherent message would affect most of the population the same way, but increasingly the same techniques and narratives will have differing effects on different populations. So what we tend to see more and more of is propaganda generating smaller more fanatical groups along with others forming backlash against tem.. it kinda works if you examine only the successful parts of the application, but is no longer all that useful for changing general public perception, just creating partisans.
      • You've got the same biological responses that have always been in play (sex, emotional cues, peer pressure, etc.) that do just as much to serve as inhibit propaganda (some of the propaganda from WWII inferring peace-niks were back home having relations with lonely wives were just as likely to cause doubt as remind people what they were fighting for), and also disinfo campaigns (serving up several platitudes that you probably accept with a few questionable ones so you are less inclined to question their vali

      • by dj245 ( 732906 )

        Something I will be curious to see over the next few decades is how propaganda is affected by advertising saturation. Something that has been worrying marketers is that young consumers (ones more accustomed to multitasking and who grew up with heavy advertizing) filter out a larger amount of marketing than other groups. Even as their knowledge and skills improve (ah, the dark uses of all those psych majors), advertising is becoming more difficult and consumers more jaded and less uniform. Since propaganda can be seen as a specialized form of marketing, I wonder how that type of manipulation is going to adjust. It used to be that one coherent message would affect most of the population the same way, but increasingly the same techniques and narratives will have differing effects on different populations. So what we tend to see more and more of is propaganda generating smaller more fanatical groups along with others forming backlash against tem.. it kinda works if you examine only the successful parts of the application, but is no longer all that useful for changing general public perception, just creating partisans.

        Having traveled to North Korea and seen what propaganda looks like, you are wrong. Good propaganda is something that people want to believe, or could easily believe, even if it isn't true. Good propaganda has no opposing viewpoint that is credible. Good propaganda speaks to the choir, where the choir intentionally designed to be the largest possible audience. And anyone who isn't in the choir is a bad person.

        Consider as just one example the propaganda that in North Korea, everyone must choose from 28 [time.com]

  • Dubious (Score:5, Insightful)

    by unixcorn ( 120825 ) on Thursday April 23, 2015 @07:13AM (#49535411)

    I am well beyond millennial status and I approve of what Snowden did so I am not sure I believe the survey results. While I do approve, I also wrestle with the fact that he broke the law and put Americans in jeopardy. That makes me wonder how the questions were asked. I mean I can certainly dislike someone but approve of what they did.

    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      I've only just turned 35 so am on the border of being a "millennial", but I thought that phrase referred to people around the 15-25 range who were teenagers around the 2000-2009 time frame. 34 seems a bit old... More like gen X or gen Y.

      • Re:Dubious (Score:4, Informative)

        by Carewolf ( 581105 ) on Thursday April 23, 2015 @07:30AM (#49535549) Homepage

        I've only just turned 35 so am on the border of being a "millennial", but I thought that phrase referred to people around the 15-25 range who were teenagers around the 2000-2009 time frame. 34 seems a bit old... More like gen X or gen Y.

        Generation X. The generation born by babyboomers, usually from 1970 to early 1980s. Teenagers in the late 80s and early 90s.

        I think that what was shortly referred to as Gen Y are now millenials (Gen Y were those born too late to be Gen X).

    • Re:Dubious (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 23, 2015 @07:26AM (#49535521)

      I'll be 50 in a couple of years and I think Snowden was a hero. Possibly he even qualifies as a super hero.

      If you just look at the questions asked, they slanted the whole thing.

      Of course Snowden hurt national security. But there are thins more important than national security. Like freedom.

        If we don't have Freedom, then we are better off without national security, because maybe some freedom fighers (aka terrorists) will liberate the people of the US from the government.

    • I am well beyond millennial status and I approve of what Snowden did so I am not sure I believe the survey results. While I do approve, I also wrestle with the fact that he broke the law and put Americans in jeopardy. That makes me wonder how the questions were asked. I mean I can certainly dislike someone but approve of what they did.

      Perhaps what you should be struggling more with is the fact that Snowden revelations haven't done a damn thing to hinder the abuses of our own government.

      It's practically funny how you struggle with the fact that Snowden broke the law, and yet you find exactly ZERO laws broken on the government side.

    • Re:Dubious (Score:5, Informative)

      by IamTheRealMike ( 537420 ) on Thursday April 23, 2015 @07:32AM (#49535573)

      These are large percentages we're talking about here. Even in the older age brackets about a third of people are supporting Snowden so the fact that you fall into that category doesn't mean much.

    • Re:Dubious (Score:5, Informative)

      by amiga3D ( 567632 ) on Thursday April 23, 2015 @09:03AM (#49536457)

      My Dad is an 89 year old WWII vet who is so conservative he makes John Boehner look like a member of the ACLU and HE approves of Snowden. He calls him a hero.

  • I was at the U.S. Embassy in Laos monday morning. It was a horrible experience. A brand new embassy building staffed with paranoid idiots. When I got home to Thailand I described the experience at
    http://www.andycanfield.com/Th... [andycanfield.com]
    I may be 66 years old, but Ed Snowden is my hero. He can sleep on my floor any time. He could sleep on my sofa if I had a sofa.
    • I was at U.C. Berkeley in 1968. We forced the US out of Vietnam, we brought down Richard Nixon. We can do it again; we can bring down the US NSA.

      How? The same way we did it before - by teaching everyone we meet. What did we teach them in the 1960's? "The government MIGHT be lying to you." Once they learned that, they began thinking and checking, and they saw that very often the government WAS lying. When Richard Nixon denied the accusations, noboty believed him.

      What do we need to teach people today? Perhaps it is "The government does not TRUST you." The constitution says that Barack Obama is the boss of the NSA, and that the AMERICAN PEOPLE are the boss of Obama. So how can an organization not trust the boss? Keith Alexander has admitted to Congress that the NSA has lied to the American people, who are his boss. You lie to the boss you get your ass kicked. This posted message is part of that education.

      The question is not whether Ed Snowden can get a fair trial. The question is whether Keith Alexander can get a fair trial. So far he hasn't had a trial at all, depite his confession that his agency broke the law.

  • by fortfive ( 1582005 ) on Thursday April 23, 2015 @07:14AM (#49535423)

    I wonder if the study controlled for the fact that people tend to get more conservative as they age.

    I bet if Snowden had done his thing in the 90's, the age distribution of approval would be similar, and I bet you'd get the same result in another 15 years, when those same millennials have kids and are facing their mortality.

    Progressive ideals are risky, and it takes more courage to take risks as folks age and have more to lose.

    Note this is purely an academic comment and is not meant to endorse or deny either snowden or the NSA.

  • digital natives (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward

    Please, I hate that word. It's ok for Facebook and Google to data mine the shit out of the stuff their emails and instant messages, but when the govt does it everyone flips their shit. I'm not saying the govt is innocent, but rather, they should be boycotting these corporate entities with similar fervor.

    Millenials are dumb. I do research on data mining (not for the govt).

    • Young people are fleeing FB in droves. Soon the only people on FB will be your grandma and your aunt locked in a never ending loop of right wing troll forwards. "RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: OBUMMER HATES AMERICAN PROOFS!!!!!!!!!"

  • by tmosley ( 996283 ) on Thursday April 23, 2015 @07:16AM (#49535441)
    So...don't trust anyone over 30?
  • This kind of contradicts the polls that came out way back in 2013, but I'm not surprised how our media can sway public opinion. ACLU has their own article about it which portrays it in a slightly different light, with poll results linked at the bottom https://www.aclu.org/news/inte... [aclu.org]
  • Was any attempt made to correlate people's views with the propaganda^w news sources that they viewed/read the most?

  • I bought a picture of his face with the words AMERICAN HERO right under it as soon as I read this headline. Guess it's time to get out and do some proselytization.

    • That comment would have been a lot cooler if I'd written it correctly. I bought a T-Shirt with his face on. I'd look a right moron walking around with a printed, loose picture of Snowden saying LOOK AT THIS

      Yes, slashdot, I know it's only been a minute since I posted a comment, but could you just let me post this and move on with my life?

  • Stazi (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 23, 2015 @07:22AM (#49535491)

    Conventional wisdom says that the young and idealistic grow up and shed their naive ideals as they confront the real world. By that logic, as millennials age, they will recognize the need for the surveillance state to keep us safe from terrorism.

    Real World? How about that terrorism isn't as big a threat as we are led to believe? We have a media that makes billions of dollars a month in scaring the shit out of us and by being bombarded by that shit, we begin to think that terrorism is right around the corner. Perception bias. I live in meth country, according to the media, I should be experiencing high crime and meth labs blowing up every day. We had one in the last five years and one before my state's legislature passed a law that made getting Sudafed harder to get than a gun - I'm in the South.

    The other thing is, East Germany and the old communist states. My fellow old people forgot those abuses and are under the delusion that our government is beyond such things; when in fact, we are seeing an out of control security government bureaucracy. Are my fellow old people concerned? Nope. We are all worried about Clinton's email server, Benghazi, IS, gay marriage, and other social "issues" that some how are going to ruin our country and our freedoms.

    I really don't think my fellow Americans know WTF Freedom means.

  • Perhaps the standing question for every demographic as we try and paint a "Like" button on Snowden himself is, what if Snowden never happened?

    Seems no one wants to think about how much worse this could have gotten. Unfortunately, apathy will ensure the inevitable, since I'm surprised the pollsters found enough people who still give a shit about this at all to form any opinion.

  • We may dislike or like E.Snowden. But there is no denial, there is the world Before Snowden and After Snowden. I am not sure which one is better, the same as the Dark Ages could be not better than Pax Romana. But that is what happened, and it is impossible to put toothpaste back into the tube.
  • by zwede ( 1478355 ) on Thursday April 23, 2015 @07:26AM (#49535519)
    The data shows Snowden has more support than the US Congress.
  • Yeah yeah the current generation is going to go and change things. Just like how all the hippies in the 1960s went into government and legalized pot. Oh no wait they didn't. They sold out harder than ever.

  • by GroeFaZ ( 850443 ) on Thursday April 23, 2015 @07:41AM (#49535643)
    Problem solved.
  • Well (Score:5, Insightful)

    by MitchDev ( 2526834 ) on Thursday April 23, 2015 @07:46AM (#49535699)

    I'm 45 and I say give him a Medal of Honor, the man is better for the US than all of Congress and the President combined.

  • by MobyDisk ( 75490 ) on Thursday April 23, 2015 @08:12AM (#49535895) Homepage

    According to John Oliver [youtube.com] most people think Edward Snowden is Julian Assange. Oliver did "man-on-the-street" style interviews in New York, asking people who Snowden was. Most people, if they knew the name at all, thought he was "the guy who sold government secrets to Wikileaks."

    The report doesn't mention this at all, so I'm not sure what to make of the statistics. If you asked people "Which color is brighter: green or brown" but they had never heard of brown before, you wouldn't be able to draw many meaningful conclusions from it. The report itself [aclu.org] doesn't even mention what questions they asked people. There's really just no information here at all.

  • by Sir_Eptishous ( 873977 ) on Thursday April 23, 2015 @10:44AM (#49537483) Homepage
    Is it just me or does this seem ironic?
    Generally it seems Millenials(the ones I know and work with) are more accepting of surveillance by the government and corporations.

    Gen X and the Boomers have more of the 20th century leftover attitude that Americans have a right to privacy, and that the blood and treasure spent to keep the "World Safe for Democracy" by the "Greatest Generation", etc, The Constitution, etc, means we have those rights.

    You would think Millenials would be more apathetic to the whole Snowden thing(which has been my experience talking to people about it). The attitude I've encountered is the usual, "I'm just on FB posting videos, etc, playing games, etc", "I'm not doing anything wrong", "why should I care?"

    My experience is that Gen X and the Boomers are much more paranoid and concerned about rights, etc;

1.79 x 10^12 furlongs per fortnight -- it's not just a good idea, it's the law!

Working...