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

301–310 of 1001 posts

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#301

Post by gldalmaso »

gameswithgo wrote: post #127
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…

Greenwald has never operated in a way that concerns itself with the consequences of actions. The philosophy is "we report, freely, what we believe to be true and fair, and whats comes of it does not matter". I am personally torn on this kind of philosophy. Would that everyone was like this, but since they are not, surely there are times when too much is on the line to behave this way? He explicitly talks about this a…

It is definitely a two-edged blade. It might serve as a moral pillar to Greenwald, but it also makes him easy to manipulate. One could feed the leak at the time where it would do most damage and know that where other editors would think twice Glenn would jump on it.

Sadly I have the feeling that good faith journalism has no role to play nowadays. It doesn't have the reach and credibility it needs to justify it. People now "inform" themselves in a decentralized manner, seldom break their bubble and don't care much about facts preferring narratives. The hardest facts and science can be presented and it will still come out as narrative.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#303

Post by xref »

starkd wrote: post #145
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…

It's amusing to see people on the left arguing against open debate. Don't they realize this is what leads to fascism? You can oppose at the front door, but it can easily sneak in the backdoor.

From your posts in this thread it’s obvious you’re not commenting in good faith, and again here have made a strawman. There’s nobody here arguing against open debate.

The Intercept decided an article fell below their journalistic standards and chose not to publish it. That only leaves ninety-million other places for Glen to publish it, and by his own admission he has this right.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#304

Post by dragonwriter »

nickysielicki wrote: post #232
CogentHedgehog wrote: post #64

Keep in mind we're just seeing Greenwald's side of this. It sure sounds like he's trying to paint it a way that makes him look good and the Intercept look bad. Lots of claims of "censorship" etc. I want to hear their side of it as well. My guess is that there's a lot more to this story. My guess is if all his peers thought the claims were not solid enough to publish, there is probably a reason for that -- not simply…

> not simply a desire to "censor" someone they've worked with for years. This reads as though you're implying The Intercept existed independently of Greenwald. They didn't, he co-founded The Intercept . He ought to (and I imagine, he does) have seniority on any editor. I think it speaks volumes about him as a journalist and his journalistic integrity that he setup The Intercept as an outlet where he and his co-founde…

> He ought to (and I imagine, he does) have seniority on any editor.

He may or may not have some contractual guarantee of independence, but his own statement of the situation indicates that he and his cofounders deliberately chose not to have the authority and responsibility that goes with running the show but to leave that to others so that they could keep being reporters.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#305

Post by [deleted] »

uncoder0 wrote: post #217
mundo wrote: post #180

It seems impossible to hold a strong opinion on this without reading the article, and in particular, seeing how it is sourced. The elephant in the room (which Greenwald barely acknowledges in this essay) is that many mainstream news organizations have concluded that the evidence for this story was too weak to publish, and some believe it was fabricated by Russian intelligence. If Greenwald has evidence to the contrar…

>The elephant in the room (which Greenwald barely acknowledges in this essay) is that many mainstream news organizations have concluded that the evidence for this story was too weak to publish, and some believe it was fabricated by Russian intelligence. Senate Homeland Security committee and DNI director both said that this was not an issue of foreign disinfo. In addition there is an interview from one of the co-cons…

[deleted]

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#306

Post by a_band »

happytoexplain wrote: post #296
a_band wrote: post #201

Amazing the amount of people who are essentially reacting with "Greenwald was spreading foxnews disinfo" without even having read his article.

How many people have asserted that they personally believe Greenwald was spreading disinformation and have also stated that they did not read his article?

His article hasn't been published. Unless they've somehow got access to it, there's no way to verify it.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#307

Post by technoplato »

CogentHedgehog wrote: post #64

Keep in mind we're just seeing Greenwald's side of this. It sure sounds like he's trying to paint it a way that makes him look good and the Intercept look bad. Lots of claims of "censorship" etc. I want to hear their side of it as well. My guess is that there's a lot more to this story. My guess is if all his peers thought the claims were not solid enough to publish, there is probably a reason for that -- not simply…

This is definitely true, but why is this post removed from the front page? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24934192

Edit: I'm a moron and it just dropped a bunch suddenly. Was not removed.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#308

Post by Rudism »

meowface wrote: post #176
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…

You're assuming it's a garbage story and that it's intended to influence the election based on absolutely nothing. Why not make counter-arguments to the actual piece, when it comes out? I'd argue that all of the rampant censorship about any conceivable questioning or criticism of Biden is the thing that history is likely going to look back on in a few months, and perhaps years, as unethical and irresponsible journali…

It's not based on nothing. It's based on a pattern of the current administration and the media that supports it propping up nonsense and blowing stories that are critical of their opposition out of proportion specifically in order to rile people up and influence elections. Pizzagate, Hillary's emails, Q-Anon, these things all take a toll on people who actually care about what is true and real.

Is it really surprising that after all the overblown conspiracy nonsense we've been battered with from the White House and Trump that people have grown suspicious and weary of new stories that smell even remotely similar? It's gotten to the point where if Trump supports a story I assume it's probably untrue by default just because of the sheer volume of lies and nonsense he retweets on a daily basis. I don't know anything about the Hunter Biden story. Maybe it's loaded with true, damning information against Biden. If so, it's too bad, because we are neck deep in a boy-who-cried-wolf situation here and I'm not going to learn about it until it's been verified and reported by media outlets that I can actually trust.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#309

Post by starkd »

vanattab wrote: post #157
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…

His argument is not nonsense. Even assuming you buy the line that the media is not covering the story because it has "has all the hallmarks" of a Russian disinformation campaign as was argued by all the media outlets it makes no sense why they wouldn't cover it (unless your assume they are worried about how it might effect the election). Just months before the idea that a trump administration offical (or close person…

And Biden could/should have addressed this issue. Before he got the nomination, a number of outfits - Politico, Bloomberg - were running stories about his deals. Back when they wanted someone different nominated. You thnk the democrats would have learned not to nominate another clinton.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#310

Post by mundo »

__blockcipher__ wrote: post #216
mundo wrote: post #180

It seems impossible to hold a strong opinion on this without reading the article, and in particular, seeing how it is sourced. The elephant in the room (which Greenwald barely acknowledges in this essay) is that many mainstream news organizations have concluded that the evidence for this story was too weak to publish, and some believe it was fabricated by Russian intelligence. If Greenwald has evidence to the contrar…

It is undeniably not fabricated Russian intelligence. We have: - e-mails which have been confirmed by the others on the e-mails - videos of hunter biden engaging in sexual activity while doing hard drugs - text messages between hunter and various family and associates - audio tapes of Hunter Biden's voice talking about his Chinese business partner disappearing - financial documents of the agreement between various pa…

Oooh! What kind of sex? Which drugs? ...yes, that would be the salacious hearsay I was referring to. If there's evidence that Joe Biden did something corrupt, I'd like to see it, but without the rest of the chaff.
Post reply on HN