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

891–900 of 1001 posts

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#891

Post by intended »

zarkov99 wrote: post #181
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…

I agree there is a huge opportunity for a trusted institution to do journalism. But who would anyone trust? The incentives in the media point towards pandering and outraging. Left to the shareholders a news organization is mandated to maximize short term profit in whatever way it can. So capitalism is out. Perhaps a benevolent billionaire could support such an effort? But again, who would trust him? Its a pikle.

This is among the oddest conversation for a startup focused board.

What is the market size ?

Recently there was a debacle in India where a news channel corrupted the ratings system.

In the discussions that followed, it turns out that the news industry pays peanuts.

If there is no real market, and just passion projects and idealism- then what’s going on?

Matter of fact India is a good example of what happens. Small independent teams making good news content and the vast majority of the news corrupted into ratings farms.

There may not be any market here.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#892

Post by throwre24234 »

dmix wrote: post #394
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…

> Mind you I'm not saying WaPo and NYT are trash now WaPo and NYT aren't trash but they have fallen mightly. Which sucks because NYT easily has one of the best web design teams on the internet IMO and I used to look forward to reading it daily for over a decade. I'm still angry that they chose to go all Buzzfeed and hammer it everywhere politicially on their website. WSJ has been a fine replacement, but it's not as e…

> WaPo and NYT aren't trash but they have fallen mightly.

As a Indian, I disagree. The reportage on anything India is the usual mix of patronizing caste-curry-cow (and now 'Hindu terror') BS. The morons in-charge of international news at every one of these outlets (incl. Intercept, Twitter, Google..) think that just because they are white, their imagination of the world is the reality.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#893

Post by nojito »

juniper_strong wrote: post #678
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…

I've stopped caring about institutions' reputations because I don't need them to gatekeep for me anymore. If I want to read about finance, I can read Matt Levine. If I want to read about law I can read Eugene Volokh. If I want to read about about security I can read Bruce Schneier. In every category I care about, there are writers who are experts who make their expert opinions known without me having to subscribe to…

Those are opinion writers not journalists.

It’s a sad state of affairs when people confuse the two.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#894

Post by intended »

rorykoehler wrote: post #839
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?

The Biden story sounds like bs? I was under the impression that their alleged behaviour was the de facto standard in a capitalist system. I’d be surprised if anyone with that kind of power wasn’t leveraging it to secure generational wealth. It’s like athletes and doping. You’d be stupid not to try given the potential rewards.

From what I gather, the circumstances for the “laptop” to be obtained by a legally blind store an improbably large distance away from anywhere hunter Biden would be, is among the first of many red flags that this is a disinformation attempt.

Part of it getting past scrutiny, is playing on the assumption that people will cheat.

I mean sure, but this stupidly? After Trump used taxpayer money to stay at his hotels publicly?

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#895

Post by DebtDeflation »

lordnacho wrote: post #316
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…

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…

I still don't understand why (apart from money) the major cable news networks allow Paid Partner trash to fill up the bottom of the front page of their websites. "Leading gut doctor: I beg every American to throw out this vegetable NOW!" type nonsense.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#896

Post by harryf »

Cheezemansam wrote: post #782
joe_the_user wrote: post #764

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 st…

"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. Sure, but that isn't the central issue here that Greenwald is claiming.

Also Glen talked about why he's so upset with journalists at the moment with Joe Rogan this week - https://youtu.be/vk1rSvnvXoY?t=262

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#897

Post by nickysielicki »

ilikehurdles wrote: post #787

Someone pretty familiar with Greenwald posted a pretty thorough, point-by-point takedown of the piece he wanted The Intercept to publish, and ended up publishing himself: https://twitter.com/emptywheel/status/1321923054499495938?s=... Frankly, if you read his original piece, it's exhaustingly shoddy. To say he needs an editor is putting it lightly.

I can’t believe that you genuinely would consider these tweets to be a “thorough point-by-point takedown” of the article.

If anything, her counter arguments were so weak that I’m even more strongly in support of Greenwald than before.

For example, at one point she implies that we should not trust the emails (and further, that it is incorrect to claim that emails have been leaked), because they are pictures of emails instead of text files. What?

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#898

Post by jpadkins »

monkeydreams wrote: post #734
blhack wrote: post #27

Glenn had a 3 hour long conversation on a podcast a few days ago where he laid out the problem really well: Journalists have essentially become socialites. They don't want to publish articles that will rock the boat, because the people they are friends with are the ones that own that boat, invite them to parties, and are a part of their friend groups. The reporting around this story has been absolutely unbelievable t…

> Glenn had a 3 hour long conversation on a podcast a few days ago where he laid out the problem really well: .... > The reporting around this story has been absolutely unbelievable to me OK, here's the thing though. This is what I call the "Jordan Peterson school of thought." You begin with a premise. Hunter Biden left his laptop at a repair store, some files were found on it, and these were delivered to a Republica…

Does the method of collection matter for determining the truth of the matter? This is the same defense or reasoning as the HRC emails in 2016. Does it matter if HRC emails were a DNC insider or a foreign agent hacking? Does it matter Hunter emails, msgs and videos were from an abandoned laptop, a chinese blackmail operation, or another source?

Isn't the real question: are the emails authentic? Or have they been manipulated? What do the emails and private messages tell us? What can other sources corroborate? I think this is Glenn's point. There are sources coming forward saying the emails and meetings that involve them are authentic.

The Biden campaign has never disputed the authenticity of the contents of the HDD (because that is a trap. they know that the trump campaign has evidence, and they are smart to not get caught in a lie. then the lie about the laptop becomes the story)

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#899

Post by mschuster91 »

DebtDeflation wrote: post #895
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…

I still don't understand why (apart from money) the major cable news networks allow Paid Partner trash to fill up the bottom of the front page of their websites. "Leading gut doctor: I beg every American to throw out this vegetable NOW!" type nonsense.

> "Leading gut doctor: I beg every American to throw out this vegetable NOW!" type nonsense.

That and obscure investments into shitcoins. I get that the FDA and every other public health agency worldwide has more pressing problems than quacks, but what are the SEC and their European counterparts doing all day? I'd expect them to investigate scams and questionably legal "investment" opportunities.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#900

Post by wrren »

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.

Being on Substack solves the problem of censorship by way of one's editor or organization. It re-introduces the problem of unedited journalism; i.e journalism that isn't passed through a degree of peer review to ensure rigour. It seems as though it's no longer guarantee both full journalistic freedom and rigour at the same time.
Post reply on HN