[jocro]

> Whether to call it a back door / flaw / trade-off is just quarreling over semantics

I think this is writing off a significant portion of the meta-story here, semantics matter very much in journalism. While the technical nuances of trust are important, they won't be understood or digested by the average reader. What will be remembered is the headline, which doesn't say "Whatsapp is as secure as iMessage" it just says "Whatsapp has a backdoor".

The story you tell is framed by the audience that's listening, and the framing the Guardian chose unfairly paints Whatsapp as not just secure, but less secure than alternatives by singling them out. That's not an accurate story.