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

911–920 of 1001 posts

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#911

Post by sam_goody »

noelsusman wrote: post #747
pvarangot wrote: post #621

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you read his story? It's good, it's serious and it calls out the democrats about some real bullshit like inventing a fake Russian intelligence operation to not respond to allegations that come from the emails. I don't care if a journalist has a paranoid delusion as long as they are doing good writing and due diligence, and Glenn's story has both. He's not the most stable individual and he has made mistakes in the…

I read it, or at least as much of it as I could get through. Good writing and due diligence are the last words I would use to describe that piece. It was more of a rant than an article. Glenn has been pushing the boundaries more and more every year, and it's not surprising that this is the article that finally made his editors draw a line in the sand. I even think he has several good points buried in there, but it re…

If the best you can do is call him names, just don't weigh in.

The article may be a form of a rant, but it is meant as a opinion, and an articulate and specific opinion at that. Everything he says is either very believable, obvious, or verifiable. You may not like what he is preaching, but give examples of what is incorrect, and why, or just go home.

Generally, labeling ("screed from an unhinged man"), hyperbole ("as much as I could get through"), unjustified claims ("pushing the boundaries more and more") and projections ("it's not surprising") are all great in debate class, and do wonders in a courtroom (unfortunately), but they are not content, they are tools of persuasion.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#912

Post by skinkestek »

rodgerd wrote: post #602
hluska wrote: post #489

Honestly HN, what in the fuck?? The comments here have run the gamut from conspiracy to arguing there’s a purge coming against the media. If this is the state of ‘hacking’, I’m cancelling my internet access.

HN is overrun with Trumpalos.

More like HN has started waking up.

Many of us don't like Trump at all, we are just sick and tired of media lies.

My lawn sign, if I had one would be "any reasonable person".

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#913

Post by [deleted] »

nindalf wrote: post #331

With respect to Greenwald, his view that publishing something is an unmitigated good and can be countered by other reporting is only true in theory, not in practice. Since he’s talking about publishing an article about a Democratic presidential candidate days before an election, let’s compare that to the last time this happened. Every media outlet starting from the NYT breathlessly repeated “but her emails”. Some of…

[deleted]

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#914

Post by achileas »

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…

That's not the issue here. Greenwald just doesn't like having editors and thinks he's above having them, when he's clearly not after desperately pushing a clear propaganda story.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#915

Post by [deleted] »

nojito wrote: post #893
juniper_strong wrote: post #678

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

[deleted]

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#916

Post by afiori »

refurb wrote: post #778
ggggtez wrote: post #346

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's also the kind of story that can break someone's journalistic career. Even Fox News wouldn't run the story because it wasn't supported by facts. And last I heard, there still has been no concrete evidence of wrongdoing. Tucker Carlson claims that his evidence "got lost in the mail". In the age of the internet, they didn't snap any photos of this so-called proof? There is no "there" there. Just a bunch of internet…

Even Fox News wouldn't run the story because it wasn't supported by facts. Run what story? Fox news has been covering the hard drive since it was released. And yes, no concrete evidence of wrong doing, but if you read Glenn's email, he clearly states that "something smells rotten" and the editors response is "we won't even allow pointed questions about Biden". Glenn is offering the Biden camp more benefit of the doub…

This especially applies so soon after Trump tax return story, which where objectively result of hacking (unless Trump himself leaked them) and had zero verification.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#917

Post by Ensorceled »

a5withtrrs wrote: post #868

Lots of people here weighing in with their 2c about the authenticity of the data, but why is everyone arguing about this? Sure, we the technologically savvy people have the means to verify the digital authenticity of these files/emails/documents. But we don't have access to them (and likely won't). So we can't actually claim one way or the other for sure until we do.

"We have VERY damaging information about the presidential candidate surfacing days before the election in outlandish circumstances but it's not available for forensic review/got lost in the mail."

Yes, we can't be 100% sure that these things are fake but it strains credulity to believe them.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#918

Post by rurban »

This was an interesting thread for meta information. Before the very first 150 comments you could immediately see who the spooks on HN were and who not. But since this somewhat useful info is now buried in over 1300 comments, you can only see who is merely influenced by the spooks and their media meddling and who not.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#919

Post by pelliphant »

TearsInTheRain wrote: post #333
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.

Did you watch the Tony Babulinksi interview with Tucker Carlson? It shows that Joe Biden had an ownership stake in and was directly involved with his son's company that received a 5-10 million forgivable loan from a top member of the Chinese Communist party. This directly contradicts claims Joe Biden has made throughout his campaign and at the last debate.

Why the fuck would you use that as a source?

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#920

Post by pibechorro »

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…

NYT is not an objective publication, they have a heavy bias.
Post reply on HN