Not a single word about PRISM. It appears that Greenwald has finally realized that his reporting on that program was embarrassingly wrong, but he doesn't have enough integrity to issue a correction.

What did he misrepresent?

Snowden's slides show that PRISM is a data integration program with the FBI to ingest data for specific accounts that the FBI collected under court order into the NSA's databases. The FBI Data Intercept Technology Unit is very clearly labeled in the diagram slide. It is not a way for the NSA to get unfettered access to any account's data directly from the Internet companies, as Greenwald notoriously claimed.

The New York Times talked to tech literate people and got the story right the day after Greenwald published his first PRISM story, so it wasn't that hard to figure out. Greenwald continued to foolishly claim the slides said something they did not for months afterwards in his reporting. Meanwhile, the rest of the news media correctly labeled PRISM a nothingburger. https://www.cnet.com/news/no-evidence-of-nsas-direct-access-...

These are the people who were tapping the lines between Google data centers.

Nothingburger?!

Is this post from a Virginian IP?

> These are the people who were tapping the lines between Google data centers.

That isn't PRISM.

Your comment used vague, sweeping terminology that would give the passerby reader excuses not to give a shit.

So,

What vague, sweeping terminology did I use? I specifically talked about PRISM, described how Greenwald's description of PRISM was ludicrously wrong, and noted that Greenwald didn't mention PRISM at all in this article and has never issued a correction for his PRISM reporting. Those are highly descriptive, highly specific statements.

Really curious what you mean by this.