Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

My Resignation from the Intercept

greenwald.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 1001 posts

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#221

Post by meowface »

ivalm wrote: post #86
1980phipsi wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would withhold any opinion that it is a "garbage story" until actually reading it...

It is about emails which have no headers, that are impossible to verify, that were “known to fbi” for a long time but didn’t produce any action (because likely fake), and that are specifically being pushed to change outcome of election despite, again, no real evidence of their veracity.

They should be treated with caution and skepticism, but you seem to be using motivated reasoning without an impartial look of the actual probabilities. There's no hard proof they're real and no hard proof they're doctored. This requires a rigorous analysis, not dismissal.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#222

Post by Tokkemon »

macspoofing wrote: post #38

When William Roper argued that he'd "cut down every law in England" in order to get the Devil, Thomas More responded with: "And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat?" ... This is where the entire mainstream center-left/left news establishment, along with the DNC, ended up after 2016. Trump broke people's brains. It's as simple as that.

... what?

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#223

Post by albroland »

nojito wrote: post #92
1980phipsi wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would withhold any opinion that it is a "garbage story" until actually reading it...

If the entire editorial team and his peers rejected it, it seems pretty clear.

The same editorial team and peers that tried to get Lee Fang fired for having the audacity to interview actual residents in areas where rioting was happening?

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#224

Post by amadeuspagel »

bachmeier wrote: post #20

"as a last-ditch attempt to avoid being censored, I encouraged them to air their disagreements with me by writing their own articles that critique my perspectives and letting readers decide who is right" That's not how this works. If the editor concludes that it's a garbage story dropped a few days before the election in an attempt to influence the election, you don't run it and then "let the readers decide who is ri…

That's apparently how it was supposed to work at the intercept, according to his contract. Strange that he thinks his readers ... are actually going to read the article?

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#225

Post by SamBam »

__blockcipher__ wrote: post #76
tolbish wrote: post #34

It would be so very, very interesting if Trump were to pardon Snowden.

It's such a no-brainer since the national security apparatus (the FBI, NSA, etc) were used against Trump and his campaign very transparently. So you'd think he would want to strike a blow against them by pardoning Snowden. In reality, he doesn't seem to have a deep, principled understanding of the issues of the "national security" apparatus (commonly known as the "deep state"). So I'm not optimistic, although maybe h…

> It's such a no-brainer since the national security apparatus (the FBI, NSA, etc) were used against Trump and his campaign very transparently.

A Republican-led senate investigation found that the intelligence community was not used against Trump, did not illegally spy on his campaign, and was fully-correct in following up on the Russia leads. [1]

Do you have evidence that the Republican and Democratic senators did not?

1. https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/513499-republicans-i...

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#226

Post by dash2 »

drchopchop wrote: post #48
gfodor wrote: post #6

The media has fallen into the well-known trap of optimizing the wrong KPI. You want to maximize trust with the public, not engagement, if you want your media company to survive if its value proposition is providing journalism and the usual benefits that come with a free press. Unfortunately, not only is engagement the wrong metric, but it's also one which incentivizes the undermining of the actual metric you need to…

Why would Substack solve this? It's just a more refined Medium with better monetization opportunities. Being on Substack doesn't mean the author is trustworthy, only that they have content that people will engage with (and potentially pay for), which is still the same KPI you're referring to.

Substack allows you to subscribe (paid) to an individual journalist or publication. They can then post long-form stories to your inbox. That gives them the opportunity to develop a long-term relationship with you where credibility matters.

At any rate, that is the argument. I don't think it will work, because buying journalism one journalist at a time is too expensive. Hell, buying it one paper at a time is too expensive. The better approach is the Apple News Plus or Google News one, where you pay a single subscription for a very wide range of outlets.... But, their idea isn't crazy.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#227

Post by kaesar14 »

epistasis wrote: post #132
nimbius wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>If the editor concludes that it's a garbage story dropped a few days before the election in an attempt to influence the election, you don't run it and then "let the readers decide who is right". Occhams razor: Glen Greenwald is one of the most respected journalists on the planet. the man is a modern day Cronkite. his character is beyond the pale when it comes to accurate journalism so it begs the question: What is G…

After the past few years, I do not share that assessment of Greenwald in the least. Following him on Twitter for a while caused the scales to fall from my eyes. I think he's done some good things in the past, but currently he seems off his rocker, honesty. People can change as they age, and I think he clearly has.

Can you elaborate?

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#228

Post by Tokkemon »

DevKoala wrote: post #5

We are witnessing the biggest concerted censorship effort in the history of the USA. One for the history books, depending on who gets to write it in the future. Regardless of whether or not you believe on Tony Bubolinsky, you should at the very least have the opportunity to hear him and make up your own mind. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zLfBRgeFFo

And you link to Tucker Carlson? Seriously?

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#229

Post by Cullinet »

bachmeier wrote: post #20

"as a last-ditch attempt to avoid being censored, I encouraged them to air their disagreements with me by writing their own articles that critique my perspectives and letting readers decide who is right" That's not how this works. If the editor concludes that it's a garbage story dropped a few days before the election in an attempt to influence the election, you don't run it and then "let the readers decide who is ri…

Is this the editor who wore down Snowden's patience with obstinate ignorance how to use encrypted emails despite being written tailored dummies guides, until Snowden wrote in the clear and ruined his life?

I'm not asking rhetorically I'm on my phone, and on the bus but this seems like it could lead to the incident, "I tried to teach GPG to Greenwald but I had the same problem Snowden had encountered when he reached out in December, that Greenwald was busy and couldn’t focus on it. " From : https://theintercept.com/2014/10/28/smuggling-snowden-secret...

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#230

Post by meowface »

clint wrote: post #213
karl11 wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're right that it's not how this works. Media organizations are not interested truth or accuracy of their stories, but simply how many ads and subscriptions the stories can sell. And that's not the say they are motivated by greed - even worse, they are often motivated by missionary-like zeal to promote a cause. So of course it would follow that they have no interest in publishing anything disagreeable to their rea…

Seems like if they only cared about clicks and ads they would've ran the article. From my position, they exercised the bare-minimum duties of any good editor to shut down stories they don't believe meet the standards they set for themselves. And for exercising that duty, they are leaving clicks, ad impressions, and probably a good amount of money on the table.

They're free to make that choice if that's their true assessment of it. But when Greenwald publishes his piece, if it actually is not in fact a garbage piece, they're going to look extremely bad and biased.
Post reply on HN