USA Today has published a
revision and partial retraction to their May 11 story that the National Security Agency (NSA) compiled a massive database of phone records with the cooperation of telecommunications giants. There is an article, as well as a "Note to Readers" sidebar, revising their earlier reporting and retracting charges that BellSouth and Verizon turned over phone records. (I was alerted via
http://mediabistro.com )
UPDATED
The "Note" states:
USA TODAY has now concluded that while the NSA has built a massive domestic calls record database involving the domestic call records of telecommunications companies, the newspaper cannot confirm that BellSouth or Verizon contracted with the NSA to provide bulk calling records to that database.
As far as I can tell, the story according to USA Today, as of today, is that:
- The NSA has compiled a massive, but incomplete, database of phone calls
- Qwest refused to hand over call records
- Multiple lawmakers verify that AT&T turned over records
- Multiple lawmakers state that BellSouth and Verizon did not turn over records, contradicting earlier USA Today reports, but verify that MCI did.
- Some lawmakers are concerned that the incompleteness of the database compromises its effectiveness.
- No one charges, and many deny, that eavesdropping is not a part of this program.
According to the article,
Five members of the intelligence committees said they were told that BellSouth did not turn over domestic call records to the NSA.
and
Three lawmakers said that they had been told that Verizon did not turn over call records to the NSA. However, those three and another lawmaker said MCI, the long-distance carrier that Verizon acquired in January, did provide call records to the government.
The article also sums up some of the ongoing action regarding the program, most of which have been stymied by claims of "national security".
Worth reading.
link: http://www.usatoday.com/...
UPDATE: A significant question that the article glosses over: how large and pervasive are AT&T and MCI in terms of their footprint on the nation's telecommunications infrastructure; and by corollary how insignificant are the other possible culprits?
I'm no expert, but it is my understanding that despite falling direct-to-consumer market share, AT&T and MCI together still dominate not only the consumer long-distance market, but also the business long-distance market and the long distance reseller market--meaning that they sell discounted long distance service in bulk to companies, large and small, that rebrand and sell them to their own consumers, as phone line service or calling cards (and else?). Not only that, they own and maintain much of the infrastructure through which even their competitors offer services, though I don't know how extensive those arrangements are or how easy it is for AT&T to record those calls. Plus, AT&T also provides local service in many markets, and both companies are in the VOIP market.
The upshot of all this, to my lay understanding, is that it is difficult for the average caller to avoid using these monster networks. Thus, even if AT&T and MCI turn out to be the only companies that have cooperated with this program, they could potentially yield a staggering majority of all long distance calls (and probably domestic calls as well) placed to or from the United States. And it would seem that the cooperation of these two companies is verified, and at the moment broadly assumed.
Put another way, my understanding (again, a casual one) is that the biggest fish by far are already exposed--whether or not regional Bells like BellSouth or Verizon handed over their records would have a negligible impact on the size or completeness of a database of long-distance calls because most of those inevitably pass through the AT&T or MCI infrastructure. I would think the pressure on the bigger networks was much higher, and harder to refuse. As to whether or how much AT&T or MCI themselves can lie, or remain mum, about the details of their known activities, I guess that will end up in the courts.
But I hope someone more knowledgeable than I will shed some light on this.
And what about Sprint?
ALSO: This story is now all over MSM (websites at least)--lots of Google News hits. I'm a little amused that it is being reported as anything from a flat out "retraction" to a "revisit".