We live in dark times..
We rapidly racing to become Chine 2.0
My Resignation from the Intercept
561–570 of 1001 posts
Re: My Resignation from the Intercept
#562Earlier quoted context omitted.
Media is completely sold out in the country. A purge is incoming.
Disagree with the media all you want. Leave your "purge" talk in the garbage where it belongs. This is NOT a place to promote violence.
You have no way of knowing that they had violence in mind. A "purge" of the media could just as easily mean millions of subscribers cancelling their subscriptions, causing the media companies to collapse.
From the HN Guidelines: "Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith."
Re: My Resignation from the Intercept
#563"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…
I'd like to see all of the critical statements and related content of Joe Biden that he wanted to include.
here's the article:
https://greenwald.substack.com/p/article-on-joe-and-hunter-b...
Re: My Resignation from the Intercept
#564"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…
I would withhold any opinion that it is a "garbage story" until actually reading it...
Now that his actual article has been published it is super clear Greenwald’s story is pretty garbage. He has no evidence of anything and even states so plainly. It is purely conjecture that Hunter Biden’s big mouth statements might be connected to impropriety, with utterly no proof.
Then it turns into a comically bad diatribe about bias in the press.
Greenwald over the past 4 years has become an insufferable troll. This article adds nothing new in any way, and given the wildly unjustified harm it could do to an impending election, it is beyond doubt that the Intercept editorial decision not to run this was the right decision.
Re: My Resignation from the Intercept
#565Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can't do that if its censored.
It hasn't been, though. Private citizens of a private company opted not to publish it in their paper, and that's not the same thing.
Here's the Merriam-Webster definition of censored: "suppressed, altered, or deleted as objectionable : subjected to censorship".
Government censorship is a subset of censorship. Private citizens of a private company are perfectly capable of suppressing, altering, or deleting material they consider objectionable, which seems to have been what happened in this case.
Re: My Resignation from the Intercept
#566Keep 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…
"It sure sounds like he's trying to paint it a way that makes him look good and the Intercept look bad."
omg you caught him!
Re: My Resignation from the Intercept
#567Earlier quoted context omitted.
his track record is good enough proof for any editor to know that story is NOT a garbage. I guess this is WHY they actually censored it.
You can't just waive it through on the strength of his reputation, you have to check the sources.
you have to apply the same standard to other stories then. If you wait until everything is 100% verified you'll publish nothing
Re: My Resignation from the Intercept
#568Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
what do you mean by hearsay? There are videos and pictures of him doing this stuff: sex with what looks like prostitutes and hard drugs (you can find them too on the internet). Those don't make the emails real, and it might still be a disinfo attempt, but the sex and drugs part is real for sure. This should warrant some reporting on it's own.
Re: My Resignation from the Intercept
#569Earlier 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.
[deleted]
Re: My Resignation from the Intercept
#570Honest question: is it just me or is it getting harder to determine what is factual and what is not? It seems like the US has begun to splinter such that there are two different sets of "facts" on many issues, but of course that is not how facts work. Nevertheless, when doing research and investigation is it often hard for me to pin down the truth behind any of the "facts" that are thrown at me, whether that's by the…
Back in the day, truth was what UPI, AP, CBS, NBC, and ABC agreed it was. All five outfits were in competition to break stories, but also all five were pretty centrist, and they had no effective competition. You either watched the evening news, or you read the paper, or both.
Now the various arbiters of truth diverse very strongly from each other. CNN is (picking a number) maybe 20 times as far from Fox as NBC was from CBS.
When the different sides are so far from each other, and both are constantly spewing how right they are, how do you tell what's true?