> The Rubik’s cube almost as a sex toy of those paranoid for dataveillance, a symbol of the genius needed to beat corrupt political systems.<p>Honestly? What is this garbage? Interesting commentary, maybe, but I can't say I agree with any of this. Is this a respected author or news source of whose opinion I should be more accepting?
Maybe it's just because I don't frequent social networks all that much, but I've never been exposed to this sort of depiction of Edward Snowden. The only coverage I've come across of him focused solely on what he did or his current predicament, not his image.<p>Even calling that Wired cover "sexualized" seems a little farfetched to me.
One can further an argument in this way - by simultaneously writing an article sexualizing Snowden and arguing that he is being sexualized in articles.<p>Recursion should be old hat to this crowd, though. It's not interesting or thought provoking.
I followed this expecting an analysis of the "whistleblower protection" that some people think Snowdon could have availed himself of. Instead I got "Hey, look, I hope you're not being distracted by this big media distraction I'm part of."
When presenting ideas to primates, it's helpful to create emotion and tension by introducing an element of sex. This applies to any ideas whatsoever.<p>We are animals.
This diatribe is regarding the media's handling of one of <i>many</i> recent whistleblower stories, and an atypical one at that. After beginning with a historical expiation of the etymology of the term, the author goes on to discard other current whistleblower stories, the vast majority of which the media has covered in a starkly different manner, and commits the sin they are condemning, that of sesationalizing the Snowden case.