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

531–540 of 1001 posts

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#531

Post by throwaway894345 »

ModernMech wrote: post #408
koolba wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you say with a straight face that the NY Times or WaPo has done that with liberals or Democratic candidates? Outside of tearing down Bernie Sanders I'd say it's a firm no. Prominent liberals like Alan Dershowitz say they're being socially blacklisted for not taking part in a pile on against Trump: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/03/us/alan-dershowitz-martha... Even being "neutral" is apparently not enough. It's e…

NYT consistently reported on Hillary Clinton's e-mails all throughout the 2016 campaign.

I recall the editorial team publishing a statement suggesting their neutralist approach (including publishing news that hurt Hillary’s campaign) was providing Trump too much of an advantage and commuting themselves to a more or less activist angle.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#532

Post by luckylion »

IshKebab wrote: post #288
umvi wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hosted with whom? Some private company no doubt that could be pressured to censor if a big enough twitterstorm came along.

Ultimately you just need to own a domain. You have to get pretty damn extreme before domains are confiscated.

Without Cloudflare & co, your domain will exist but your site won't be usable.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#533

Post by whimsicalism »

originalvichy wrote: post #429
marcusverus wrote: post #411

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Glenn Greenwald is a Pulitzer prize winning journalist. He broke the Snowden story--another sensational-sounding scoop which likely sounded like total bullshit at first. Is it possible that Mr. Greenwald is a better judge of whether or not there is a story here?

I think saying he brokenthe stort is a bit of a stretch. Didn’t Snowden himself contact journalists? Snowden was tightly in contact with these journalists and showed them undoubtable proof that he did indeed work with the NSA. This story as I understand it is not even close to the level of verification that the Snowden story had.

Wait so what's the claim at this point?

The Hunter Biden emails are fake? or that they are real, but Giuliani got them from Russian agents?

Or that they are real, but "the big guy" doesn't refer to Joe Biden?

Or that they are real, but Hunter Biden was just saying shit, and Joe didn't actually do any of these things?

Any but the last claim seems likely false to me, pretty hilarious to see so many on the thread arguing otherwise.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#534

Post by gkoberger »

Nacdor wrote: post #366
archagon wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> clearly the correct choice I'm sorry to have to tell you this, but saying something with confidence doesn't actually make it true.

You're right, the Mueller report is what makes it true: https://theintercept.com/2019/04/18/robert-mueller-did-not-m... > Mueller, in addition to concluding that evidence was insufficient to charge any American with crimes relating to Russian election interference, also stated emphatically in numerous instances that there was no evidence – not merely that there was insufficient evidence to obtain a criminal convictio…

The Steele Dossier was not commissioned by Clinton. The investigation was because of Carter Page, not the dossier. Mueller's scope of investigation was very narrow, was ended by Barr prematurely, and was filtered through Barr.

Donald Trump definitely solicited Russian interference in the election. His family met with Russians in Trump Tower. Right after the meeting, Trump said to expect dirt on Clinton. Soon after that, he looked into a camera and told Putin to hack Clinton. Hours later, Clinton was hacked by Russians for the first time.

Mueller may not have found a smoking gun from a legal perspective, but let's not act like this is a Democratic hoax. Trump was caught doing it again a few months later, with Ukraine, and was impeached for it.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#536

Post by colordrops »

ehsankia wrote: post #60
jtdev wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What leads you to believe that he was trying to spread misinformation? The suppression of criticism leveled against Joe Biden or any other individual in public service is a grave danger to democracy. I commend Mr. Greenwald for standing up to censorship.

Please entertain the possibility for a moment, whether you agree with it or not, that this story was indeed planted by a foreign nation for the specific purpose of manipulating our election. Do you then believe that it is responsible to willfully help spread it and blast it all over every social media site? Aren't you doing the foreign nation's bidding then? If you do agree there, then where would you draw the line f…

Is there any evidence that it was planted by a foreign national? We don't censor based on gut feelings that something was planted by a foreign national.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#537

Post by rodgerd »

kaesar14 wrote: post #227
epistasis wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

His unflagging support for Aaron Coleman doesn't phase you?

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#538

Post by luckylion »

cblconfederate wrote: post #422

Can i put another dimension without trying to be judgmental: it seems to me that the younger generations of journalists (and audiences) are a lot more censorious by nature. I don't know the causes of it but it's certainly very prevalent, and it seems all the 'dissenters' are a few decades older. There was for a while a prevalent narrative of "safety" or "safe spaces", but that has passed, and it seems that it has bee…

Young people are usually more radical, especially when they are inexperienced and believe in some ideology. Maybe we're just witnessing a generational shift in power in media where it's not a 50 year old person taking over for somebody that retires, but a 35 year old person (because more digital skills?).

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#539

Post by colordrops »

ciarannolan wrote: post #369
uncoder0 wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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…

> Senate Homeland Security committee and DNI director [...] Both of these are partisan, unreliable sources. The DNI used to be a nonpartisan that you could at least trust somewhat. Not anymore.

OK, but doesn't there have to be at least a shred of evidence from any source, partisan or not?

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#540

Post by reaperducer »

zarkov99 wrote: post #435
reaperducer wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

there is a huge opportunity for a trusted institution to do journalism There are new media organizations that do very good work, independently. But you have to look for them, and most people are too lazy to bother seeking out quality journalism when the garbage is forced in front of them every waking second by social media. The other problem is that most of the good work is regional. WTTW in Chicago, The Texas Tribun…

I have looked, many times, and I have not been able to find a single institution I would trust to keep me broadly informed. I do not think the problem is lazyness. What would you recommend for US coverage?

US coverage

...and there lies the problem/laziness.

The United States is far to large, populous, and diverse to expect a single entity to do a good job covering the entire country.

It's like reading an encyclopedia entry about wine and expecting to get insights into how 1,000 different varieties taste.

Or closer to the point, I don't expect to understand what's happening in Bangkok by reading the news in Tokyo. It's all Asia, right?

Post reply on HN