Re:How Can the New York Times Endorse an Agreement the Publi...
by ScottBurson on Thursday November 07, 2013 @09:07PM
(#6693992)
I agree with you that the editorial falls short of an endorsement -- at most, it's an endorsement of the effort, not the result, which hasn't even emerged yet.
But I don't agree that the EFF response is "ludicrous scaremongering". I think the EFF is right that there is a substantial danger here of serious problems, which the editorial mentions (even linking to a page on the subject) but doesn't, to my mind, give a sufficiently stern warning about. Furthermore, the word "secret" does not appear in the editorial. I agree with others who find it shallow and naïvely uncritical.
At the same time, there are definitely benefits to be had from trade agreements.
But I don't agree that the EFF response is "ludicrous scaremongering". I think the EFF is right that there is a substantial danger here of serious problems, which the editorial mentions (even linking to a page on the subject) but doesn't, to my mind, give a sufficiently stern warning about. Furthermore, the word "secret" does not appear in the editorial. I agree with others who find it shallow and naïvely uncritical.
At the same time, there are definitely benefits to be had from trade agreements.