Live data from Hacker News

US Media Blacks Out Snowden Interview

benswann.com

111–120 of 240 posts

Re: US Media Blacks Out Snowden Interview

#111
The reddit comment pavanky links to (by Natedogg213) does a pretty good job pointing out the fact that this story simply isn't true, and is really just another case of lazy "mainstream media sux" claims. I'd like to add something from the other end:

Yes, it's true that this snowden interview wasn't well-reported on. It certainly wasn't blacked out, or suppressed, or whatever, but editors must not have considered it front-page material. That's because it /isn't/.

On days when HN collectively has its wits about it, we're lamenting the fact that too much journalism has focused on Snowden himself, and not enough on the important stories: what was revealed, how the NSA responded, how representatives (collectively and individually), and what the likely political future is for a reform bill. These are stories that give voters important and interesting information, and they tend to be very well covered. This interview doesn't reveal interesting new information in these areas.

Re: US Media Blacks Out Snowden Interview

#112
post #91

This website, this source for "investigative journalism" includes a video that claims that there's a link between autism and vaccines. http://benswann.com/truth-in-media-vaccine-court-and-autism/

Not that I agree with Swann's assertion here, but it should be evaluated on its own, independent of Swann's history of being a fucking jackass. Having demonstrably idiotic opinions on one matter doesn't necessarily make a person wrong on another.

Re: US Media Blacks Out Snowden Interview

#113
post #37
post #3

Try searching CNN for "Snowden Interview" and there is NO mention of it. Same with MSNBC's search - nothing about this interview in the results. Also, scroll down to user "Nostromo's" counter (claiming the media did cover the story) w/links and then my reply. This kind of blatant dereliction of duty in US journalism (IMHO) presages the governments' plans for controlling the (M)essage on websites. One can only assume…

the full interview is here: https://archive.org/details/snowden_interview_en

Any reason why it's not in YouTube? Copyright takedowns don't usually work that fast, if ever.

Also any reason why it wasn't bought and uploaded to other major american media outlets?

If it was an "acceptable" political story, it would be all over, not merely on archive.org.

Re: US Media Blacks Out Snowden Interview

#114
One thing I think they need to cover is how he got hold of all these documents as a 3rd party contractor. Was it just available on a shared file server or did he had to hack into some kind of data store ?

I suspect that most government agencies where already aware of the capabilities of the NSA, either because they where cooperating or because it's so easy to get access. If Snowden could do it, how many others did it for private interests ?

Re: US Media Blacks Out Snowden Interview

#115
post #3

Try searching CNN for "Snowden Interview" and there is NO mention of it. Same with MSNBC's search - nothing about this interview in the results. Also, scroll down to user "Nostromo's" counter (claiming the media did cover the story) w/links and then my reply. This kind of blatant dereliction of duty in US journalism (IMHO) presages the governments' plans for controlling the (M)essage on websites. One can only assume…

I worked in the media for umpteen years in the past. Anyone who thinks the US press colluded with the government to black out anything is flat out crazy.

Re: US Media Blacks Out Snowden Interview

#117
post #96
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These links: a.) lip-service reporting that Snowden was-to-have an interview or b.) reduced the lengthy talk to an inconsequential soundbite. The NYT Blog - 3 days late, is it that hard for such a "renowned" journalistic enterprise? Wow! Props to the Associated Press for writing about something globally noteworthy [sarc.] in an article that few cared to carry or - God-forbid - elaborate upon. (ABC merely picked up th…

"Yes, but what about..." This is moving the goalposts.

Media reporting, on "backwater channels" (ie. Not in the 24/7 news cycle like Beiber's latest hooker or Cyrus' latest thing twerked upon) as far as the majority of the public is concerned, is now moving the goalposts?

"Yes probable citizen of an affected country, you may or may not have a right to support Snowden views on the public being informed, but it is too much to for you to complain when we don't use the powers we have to try to inform, like how we inform the public of the most mundane of things, instead of trying to influence public opinion."

Re: US Media Blacks Out Snowden Interview

#118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was surprised to hear there was a blackout. The reddit commentary shows that it was picked up, albeit with lackluster coverage. One important thing is still missing, though: Where is a link to the video that has a chance of persisting for some time? After all, this is a document of a certain historical significance, so it should be accessible. Maybe I'm to meta-cynical, but the reason for that link not existing mig…

> zeeed 3 hours ago | link > the full interview is here: https://archive.org/details/snowden_interview_en Very good quality and on archive.org.

Thanks for the link, here's the original HN submission for it (no comments yet) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7131029

Re: US Media Blacks Out Snowden Interview

#119
post #92
post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But the content is freely viewable in Germany, isn't it? Imho that would easily cover their mandate to the people (who are financing them)

For a number of days. I wonder when they will go un-publish this one. Most things disappear from their websites after 7 days, which is a "compromise" they worked out with the private media corporations.

You can't really fault them for following the restrictions set by past deals
Post reply on HN