So what you're saying is... Instead of Edward Snowden releasing documents confirming the widespread surveillance methods, he should have stolen and released indecent photos of dignitaries and ordinary citizens alike. That would have brought it home. :-)
I think you say this sarcastically but I actually believe this type of argument does have some legs to stand on. The public reaction to Snowden's revelations would have been very different.
There have been a lot of discussion and laws around "revenge porn also". For an example, in the UK it's now illegal.
Also:
"an incident with Scarlett Johansson photos that eventually lead to a ten year prison sentence of perpetrator Christopher Chaney."
Exchange the word sexually exploited with privacy invaded:
"It is a sexual violation. It's disgusting. The law needs to be changed, and we need to change. That's why these Web sites are responsible. Just the fact that somebody can be sexually exploited and violated, and the first thought that crosses somebody's mind is to make a profit from it. It's so beyond me," the "Hunger Games" actress said.
Yeah. The thing is, he was probably in no position to actually get that kind of thing as some contractor. He did what he could, expecting that people would be horrified. He should have read his history.
That's kind of digital terrorism really, take drastic measures that effect people at an individual level to get people to notice your cause. Though, might be very effective.
