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

761–770 of 1001 posts

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#761

Post by zaroth »

reilly3000 wrote: post #752
TechBro8615 wrote: post #651

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The NBC article is focused on an anonymously drafted report, which was mostly a dump of open source intel. The article criticizes that report for using a fake persona as its author. The initial disseminator of the report (who may or may not be the author of it as well) cites privacy and fear of retribution as reasons for publishing anonymously. What the NBC article does not do is address or refute any of the facts in…

You are correct that it doesn't address the laptop emails directly. The issue here is that this provably false dump that NBC identified is pushing the same basic story the laptop email attempted to expose. You're seeing domestically coordinated smear campaign. It was organized by a domestic PR firm and wrongly characterized as Russian disinformation. Certainly foreign assets (its not just Russia)have amplified it lik…

> * provably false dump*

Not a single line of the NBC article seems to be refuting a single fact from the 64-page document. They do try very hard though to smear the anonymous publisher for trying to be anonymous, and imply without any evidence that somehow this document is tied to Hunter’s email story.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#762

Post by evan_ »

ehsankia wrote: post #198
nebolo wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you be a bit more specific on what you believe to be so important/surprising/relevant about this story that would make an entire journalistic career? What is the story that is not being told, and actively being suppressed? I have been following this quite closely and can't see it.

I'm curious about this too. It definitely doesn't help that every single person involved in the story has zero credibility left, starting with a "lawyer" who has time and time again been caught peddling the president's lies, has exposed himself to a "15yo" reporter, and who the intelligence community say is being used by foreign nations to meddle in our elections.

Oof, took me a couple tries to figure out specifically which trump lawyer you were describing because your description roughly fits a few of them

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#763

Post by TechBro8615 »

reilly3000 wrote: post #752
TechBro8615 wrote: post #651

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The NBC article is focused on an anonymously drafted report, which was mostly a dump of open source intel. The article criticizes that report for using a fake persona as its author. The initial disseminator of the report (who may or may not be the author of it as well) cites privacy and fear of retribution as reasons for publishing anonymously. What the NBC article does not do is address or refute any of the facts in…

You are correct that it doesn't address the laptop emails directly. The issue here is that this provably false dump that NBC identified is pushing the same basic story the laptop email attempted to expose. You're seeing domestically coordinated smear campaign. It was organized by a domestic PR firm and wrongly characterized as Russian disinformation. Certainly foreign assets (its not just Russia)have amplified it lik…

> Emails are a remarkably verifiable thing, and ones these just aren't.

Rob Graham just verified the DKIM headers of the “smoking gun” email included in the original Post article:

https://twitter.com/erratarob/status/1322007153415200768?s=2...

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#764

Post by joe_the_user »

zaroth wrote: post #751
facet1ous wrote: post #701

I read through Glenn's draft after seeing the outrage on this thread and... it reads like a generic opinion piece. I think he makes some good points and some dumb ones, but that's besides the point in all honesty - most of the article is him just complaining about the state of the media, making accusations of double-standards, and full of inflammatory language. There's little investigative journalism, no interviews w…

It is an op-ed and was supposed to be published by the Intercept as an op-ed... The NY Times reports; > In a phone interview, Mr. Greenwald said he had received emails from Intercept editors outlining what the publication would allow and not allow in his article. “My arrangement with The Intercept since it began is my opinion pieces are not edited by anyone,” he said.

Sure and as an op-ed, the journal itself makes a decision whether it wants to front that opinion. The journal has stopped being close to Mr. Greenwald's perspective. Sure, maybe they changed the rules on him since it had become their publication. But that's a King Lear story, not a journalism story.

"You broke your promise that I'd have unlimited publication rights" is a sad story of broken promises but it's not a story of journalistic decline.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#765

Post by somjeed »

dash2 wrote: post #226
drchopchop wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 expen…

>buying journalism one journalist at a time is too expensive.

I think this closed view is partially do to how we consume media as a service vs. a cheap one time payment/view. I'm not sure if substack is a solution or if micropayments will ever kick off, but I don't see how it is more expensive to pay the journalist directly if the mass publishing mechanism is solved.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#766

Post by monkeydreams »

GLENN GREENWALD: "Your Honor, I can prove, without a shadow of a doubt, that the defendant killed Mr Smith. And I will do it with a single question. I am so certain of the defendant's guilt, I move that the court adjourn so that your Honor can begin deliberating on the sentence."

JUDGE: "Mr Greenwald, we need to establish the facts of the matter first."

GLENN GREENWALD: "That will be a breeze your Honor. A fleeting diversion from the matter at hand. I can prove the defendant's guilt with... One. Simple. Question. Like that! snaps fingers. But, more importantly, I think that forty to life is commensurate with the crime."

JUDGE: "The evidence, Mister Greenwald. I believe you said you had a question about evidence?"

GLENN GREENWALD: "Of course, your Honor. Of course. And let me just say I have the victim's children in the court today, to see justice done. You wouldn't want to not do justice in front of the victim's children would you, your Honor? Look, little Timmy is waving." (Glenn waves toward the rear of the court).

JUDGE: "That appears.. Adjusts glasses and peers intently That appears to be a waving tube man, similar to the one outside the Carpet Salesroom down the block..."

GLENN GREENWALD: (Hurriedly) "Be that as it may, your Honor, to the matter of sentenc-"

JUDGE:"It even says Carpet Warehouse on the sleeve."

GLENN GREENWALD: "I... uh..."

JUDGE:"Mr Greenwald. MISTER GREENWALD! (Bangs gavel) Did you steal this homonculus from the Carpet Warehouse?"

GLENN GREENWALD: (rushes up and snatches gavel) "Bailiff, remove Timmy Victim from the court."

JUDGE: (Stares silently at Greenwald coldly for a heartbeat) "I believe you had a question for the defendant?"

GLENN GREENWALD: "Yes, one that will-"

JUDGE: "And your entire case of guilt is based on this one question which will prove the case (He consults his notes) 'Like that!'?" (Snaps fingers)

GLENN GREENWALD: "Yes, I uh-"

JUDGE: "The question, Mr Greenwald."

GLENN GREENWALD:"I... Uh... did you-"

JUDGE: "Address the defendant, Mr Greenwald. I am not on trial here."

GLENN GREENWALD: "Defendant. Did you... on the night in question... did you kill the victim?"

DEFENDANT: (Leans forward, lips close to the microphone) "No."

GLENN GREENWALD: "Well fuck. I'm all outta ideas."

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#767

Post by jccc »

tptacek wrote: post #674
bigdict wrote: post #663

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Matt Taibbi: https://taibbi.substack.com/p/glenn-greenwald-on-his-resigna...

Those two deserve each other.

Please don’t do this here. The HN guidelines make clear the kind of community we’re going for is one that resists provocation toward the uninteresting. In particular:

“Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive.”

“Please don't sneer.”

“Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something.”

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#768

Post by WillPostForFood »

Bhilai wrote: post #671
lordnacho wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why the Economist, FT and the WSJ still have a somewhat positive reputation. They're expensive and tend to write about things that are important, not sensational. All other publications are slowly falling victim to the parametdynamicser of the entertainment game, including ones that were also in that bracket not long ago. Mind you I'm not saying WaPo and NYT are trash now, they did start with a high rep and t…

WSJ has pretty biased opinion section though where they have almost no standards.

pretty biased opinion section

Like, that's what an editorial page is? What you are really saying is, they don't have the same bias as you. As for standards, that's really unfair. They have high standards and are much more apt to invite opposing opinions than the NYT, or WaPo. They refused to endorse Trump in 2016. Good people can disagree with you for real reasons, not because they have lower standards.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#769

Post by joe_the_user »

reaperducer wrote: post #361
jrochkind1 wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the general sense, it's not a new problem. One of the main points I got from Chomsky & Herman's _Manufacturing Consent_ (1988, analyzing news from a decade earlier), is that journalists print what the government says because it's convenient -- it's less work to print what the government (or anyone else) says at a press conference than to do your own research -- AND even when it comes to privately given info, becau…

Chomsky & Herman's _Manufacturing Consent_ (1988, analyzing news from a decade earlier), While it may be good work, it's so out of date it's useless as a tool for evaluating the media landscape of today. I spent 20 years as a journalist and can tell you from first-hand experience and the contacts I have kept in the industry that the media today is not the same as the media of 2010, or 2000, or 1990, and certainly not…

I spent 20 years as a journalist and can tell you from first-hand experience and the contacts I have kept in the industry that the media today is not the same as the media of 2010, or 2000, or 1990, and certainly not the 1970's.

One of the book's major premises, as the parent mentioned, is journalists' dependence on cultivating sources. Yes, the media landscape has changed drastically - with journalists now have far few resources. If anything, this would make them more dependent on cultivated sources as well as corporate press releases and similar things.

Which is to say your argument is nothing but a vacuous "things are different" claim but the overall situation has to be "things are worse", which reinforces the book.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#770

Post by tptacek »

jccc wrote: post #767
tptacek wrote: post #674

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those two deserve each other.

Please don’t do this here. The HN guidelines make clear the kind of community we’re going for is one that resists provocation toward the uninteresting. In particular: “ Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive. ” “ Please don't sneer. ” “ Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something. ” https://…

I'm sorry. Would you like to know more about why those two deserve each other? I'm happy to deploy more words.
Post reply on HN