Fun News Activity: Spotting Partisan Views on Privacy

A few days ago, Eugene Volokh posted a response to this Reason article.  The Reason article advances the intuitively-appealing notion that those who express opinions on the NSA's data-collection efforts tend to have their opinions colored by their political ideology.  The article contends that Democrats who disagreed with President Bush's data-collection efforts now agree with President Obama's use of similar efforts because President Obama is a Democrat.  The article further argues that the same principle holds true for Republicans, with those agreeing with President Bush's strategy now expressing critical opinions of President Obama's surveillance policies.

Professor Volokh takes issues with the article's basis for these claims, noting that the difference in poll outcomes shows that many Democrats and Republicans have in fact maintained consistent opinions and that in the time between these polls people may have changed their minds for non-political reasons.

While I agree with Professor Volokh's interpretation of the article -- this interpretation holds room for the conclusion that a small percentage of Democrats and Republicans do fit the model of the blind partisan who is willing to change his or her views depending on the party in power.  This gets us to the fun news activity.

Many news programs hold panel discussions and interview pundits on the subject of the NSA's surveillance efforts.  Most of these pundits fall outside of the blind partisan model, with Republicans focusing their points on criticizing Edward Snowden, the contractor who leaked the description of the program to the press.  Democrats tend to criticize the program, often noting its origins in the Bush administration.  The pundits who tend to stick to their policy positions seem to be those who are more established on networks and who make regular appearances.

Despite this general trend, it is especially fun to see those pundits who fit into the blind partisan model described by Reason and who, through a series of mental gymnastics, misleading appeals to the Constitution, and overbroad labels of "legality" shape their support or criticism of the NSA to fit with their partisan identifications.  The pundit who does this is typically a more fanatical and less substantive contributor to the discussion, and these folks tend to be those who appear less regularly on news programs.  Flags that indicate partisan-conformity efforts include, most obviously, the party affiliation of the speaker (for example, if that speaker is a current or past senator or representative, their party label is indicated by the network).  Other signs to look for include broad appeals to the Constitution or law, overly simplistic claims of legality, shifty eyes, stammering, or overuse of introductory phrases like "well, as a matter of fact."

When you find the partisan, I recommend that you listen carefully to their arguments and see how the normative bases of these arguments square with their other talking points on the program.  Also look carefully if they make eye contact with the program's host or with the camera and see if you can catch a glimpse of how uncomfortable they really feel.  It is easier to spot than you'd expect.