I Have Been To The Darkest Corner Summary

In his essay “I Have Been to the Darkest Corners,” Glenn Greenwald attempts to convince the reader that Edward Snowden did not betray the U.S by leaking top-secret government documents proving that the government is spying on its citizens. He even goes as far as aiming to persuade people into believing that Snowden is actually a hero and martyr for enlightening the general public by focusing on the clear distinction between those in the know (the government) and the common people, who did not know they were being spied on. Charles Duhigg on the other hand, while still dealing with spying, focuses on companies spying on their customers while also touching on a (not so clear) distinction between the companies the consumers. While both essays seem to be about the power struggle between the spy-er and the spy-ee, they are truly about institutions manipulating

common citizens.
In his essay Greenwald reveals the existence of a power struggle between the government and the common citizen. He quotes Snowden stating that his [Snowden’s] mission is to provide “equal internet” that will benefit the “average person” (6). But to tackle such a task “equal protection against unreasonable search through universal laws” must first be achieved (6). Snowden continues to say that, “we must enforce a principle whereby the only way the powerful may enjoy privacy is when it is the same kind shared by the ordinary” (6). In his mission statement, Snowden’s word choice clearly confirms a division between the dominant and subordinate. He focuses on creating equality between these distinguishable groups inferring that there is a lack of it. Also by stating that the only way the powerful should have privacy is when it is the norm for everyone he further outlines the distinction showing that the powerful, in this case the government, has an advantage over everyone else. Furthermore, the fact that Greenwald has to attempt to persuade the reader that Snowden is a hero shows that the government has enough control over the citizens to somehow persuade them that Snowden is a villain. It seems that the government is trying to take the focus away from their wrong doings and make Snowden the bad guy.
Duhigg further proves there is a division between spy-ee and spy-er by explaining how companies know more about our habits than we know of ourselves. Duhigg states that people may not be aware of their habits because they become an “automatic routine” and people think less while performing these habits (7). If companies know people better than they know themselves it gives them an advantage over the people and creates a sense of power over the consumers. Furthermore, Duhigg states that, “Target knows how to trigger … habits” implying that companies are controlling the customer (13). Similar to how Greenwald, Duhigg reinforces the idea that the institution doing the spying is more dominant and powerful and the people being spied on are the subordinate.
However, Duhigg and Greenwald are not only arguing that there is a power struggle but also that this conflict derives from the manipulation of the common people by these powerful institutions.

In both examples, manipulation comes from the extreme control that these institutions exert over the people. Greenwald states that among the files provided to him by Snowden there was a ruling of the FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) court, which is “one of the most secretive [government] institutions” (10). The government kept it a secret that they could and were collecting data from all of its citizens. Government officials already have control and power over citizens, but when they begin to hide their power is when they become manipulative. As Snowden states, the same level of privacy should be share by everyone and it should be one that is “enforced by the laws of nature, rather than the policies of man” (10). When man, and in this case the government, becomes the enforcer of policy an inequality of power becomes evident which may lead to an unjustified control of the less powerful, or

manipulation.
On the other hand, Duhigg proves that institutions manipulate consumers because of the control that they have over consumers. When a company, for example Target, “triggers” a customer to go buy from them they are manipulating them. Also, because companies can track a person’s behavior and their habits they know when a person is breaking those habits, so as Duhigg states, Target will try to step in and attempt to convince buyers to shop their products instead of any other. Target and companies alike try to step in when consumers are the most vulnerable and use this weakness to manipulate the buyers.
Both authors agree that institutions benefit from the vulnerability of the people they are spying on. On the surface the authors differ in the benefits of the vulnerability but in reality agree. It may seem that in Duhigg’s example the vulnerability is used to make a profit while in Greenwald’s example the government manipulates to keep the country safe, or this is what the institutions want people to believe. But in reality, both institutions are attempting to remain in control of the people below them.