in the "new york times," the public et idiosyncrasyor lator investigated this and -- the public editor later investigated and said why. this is a story of public importance. there wasn't a really satisfactory answer. one of the editors previously worked for the "l.a. times" and also sat on this story. we also saw a story last year in "the huffington post" that found that the national security agency documents reflected that they were intercepting, collecting, and planning to use information on individuals' pornography habits to discredit them in their communities and in public on the basis of the political views they held. now, these individuals were islamists. their politics were considered radical. so we can understand why this sort of interest would be there. but it also said these individuals were not suspected to be associated with violence. these were not actually terrorists. these were people who on the basis of secret judgments made by a secret agency with no public oversight and with no authorizing legislation had decided that a certain brand of political viewpoints would auth