- cross-posted to:
- privacy@lemmy.ml
- cross-posted to:
- privacy@lemmy.ml
You must log in or register to comment.
One-man spam campaign
Is it really a “one-man spam campaign” if all he does is encourage others to send an email?
Yeah, it’s a multimillion-people mail campaign, including me after reading this article (even if i already answered a questionnaire from the european commission where i highlighted the same issues the generated mails name, and my country is against chat control)
This approach has been around in the US for a while, ex:
It’s not “spam”. This article is heavily biased.
Politico is center right. Privacy, which is anathema to capitalism and the status quo, is not something their owners are in support of. Efforts to organize people on a large scale to exercise their rights are criminalized, because power for the people means less for the wealthy.
to be clear, I obviously think the campaign against chat control is a very good and very necessary thing; I shared the article because I found the campaign methods interesting and also wanted to draw more attention to what’s going on, not because I agree with all of its framing (although I understood the “spam” in the headline to be tongue-in-cheek, maybe not everyone did though?).
I appreciate that. It’s important to note though that there’s much more wrong with their headline and subtitle than just the word “spam”. They’re trying hard to make it look as if it was really just some single peasant, who didn’t stay in his lane, abusing the powers accorded to him through modern technology, and the policymakers were so foolish as to fall for it:
One-man spam campaign ravages EU ‘chat control’ bill
A software developer from Denmark is having an outsized influence on a hotly debated law to break open encrypted apps.
They seem to think the only person allowed to have an outsized influence is Friede Springer, their owner.
