When Edward Snowden met journalists in his cramped Hong Kong hotel room in June, his mission was ambitious: to start a debate about mass surveillance. He succeeded beyond expectations, with disclosures about the NSA resonating in the US and exploding worldwide.
The debate has raged across continents. Barack Obama cancelled a trip to Moscow in protest at Russia's protection of Snowden. Brazil's Dilma Rousseff cancelled a state visit to Washington over US spying. In Germany, Angela Merkel accused the US of spying on her, prompting the White House to consider new constraints on the NSA. In Britain, David Cameron accused the Guardian of damaging national security by publishing the revelations.
US internet companies, exposed as co-operating with the NSA, fear a consumer backlash. The NSA defends its programs as constitutional and subject to oversight, arguing secrecy is essential to protect the public from terrorism. But civil liberties groups warn that surveillance exceeds congressional intent and constitutional limits.
The NSA collects vast amounts of data, including metadata—information about calls and emails rather than their content. The agency can travel 'three hops' from a target, potentially capturing networks larger than the population of Colorado. Snowden, now a fugitive in Russia, believes the NSA has dangerously over-reached, but the debate he sought is now underway.
