| ® || Snowden's Choices | 281 need for him to expose himself in this way. If he merely wanted to be a whistle-blower, he could have, as Bradley Manning did, anony- mously sent the documents to journalists as “Citizen Four.” In fact, in late May 2013, that was exactly what he did. He anonymously sent Gellman the PRISM scoop, which the Post published on June 6. He also sent Greenwald and Poitras documents while he was still the anonymous Citizen Four. Neither Gellman nor Greenwald had suggested the need for a face-to-face meeting with Snowden. Even after he had revealed his true identity to Poitras and Greenwald on June 3, the Guardian editor Ewen MacAskill offered him the option of remaining an unnamed source for the stories. He said, as he later told Vanity Fair, “You should remain anonymous; the stories are just as good without you.” However, anonymity was not part of Snowden’s long game. The reason he gave Greenwald in Hong Kong for going public in this way was to avoid having any suspicion fall on his co-workers at the NSA. Yet in the initial stories published by Greenwald, Poitras, and Gellman, Snowden had not allowed the reporters to identify him © by either name or position. If he did not act to deflect suspicion from re) his co-workers for the initial investigation, why do it a week later? In the intervening week, the FBI had already launched its criminal investigation. In any case, he did not need to be the subject of a docu- mentary film to take sole responsibility for stealing state secrets. He could have simply allowed Greenwald to identify him by name as the source in the stories. One thing that Snowden could not accomplish by anonymously transferring the documents to journalists was a starring role in the drama. If he had appeared digitally masked in Poitras’s video with an altered voice, he would not achieve fame. To do that, he needed to allow Poitras to film him committing the crime of turning over NSA documents to Greenwald. This video was also par