Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

US Media Blacks Out Snowden Interview

benswann.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 240 posts

Re: US Media Blacks Out Snowden Interview

#171

Post by foobarqux »

tptacek wrote: post #165
foobarqux wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The question I ask myself is do I think that if Snowden were an enemy of an enemy (a "good" guy) of the US that this would have the same minimal media exposure? I think "I'm terrified of being assassinated by Russian/Chinese authorities" from a major dissident asylum seeker would be getting much more play. In any case I don't think this isolated interview is very significant in itself.

See what I mean?

Something is true or not independent of whether it is dramatic.

Re: US Media Blacks Out Snowden Interview

#172

Post by thisiswrong »

alextingle wrote: post #31
bad_alloc wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I found these videos that can be viewed in Germany: 1) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4GlYh58cxKY (Interview with German translation) 2) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4x38jkFlPeg (Interview in English) Do they work for anybody else?

"Blocked in your country" (UK)

This is why it's time for a post-Google internet. No matter what you say about copyright, crucial videos like these are of high public interest and must be available to all individuals. Sadly the state of our current internet allows powerful interests to arbitrarily censor content, justifying their actions with copyright, or worse - 'protecting' children.

Re: US Media Blacks Out Snowden Interview

#173

Post by foobarqux »

ams6110 wrote: post #161
foobarqux wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That isn't how western government influences media in it's own country. Media know that the US government would be very unhappy about a certain story and they know that the US government is powerful and has carrots and sticks at its disposal. Who is going to poke the bear?

The press seems more than happy to engage in bear-poking as shown with the prior administration and others in the past. There must be some other explanation.

That's a common fallacy.

http://www.chomsky.info/books/consent02.htm

Re: US Media Blacks Out Snowden Interview

#174

Post by srl »

foobarqux wrote: post #170
srl wrote: post #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 f…

Regardless of whether it is front page material in some objective sense, do you think that if this were a Chinese or Russian dissident it would have gotten more play?

No. I've never seen an interview with a Chinese or Russian dissident be particularly prominent.

Re: US Media Blacks Out Snowden Interview

#175

Post by cinquemb »

wismer wrote: post #144
cinquemb wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel our differences in opinion are arising from what has actually taken place (I would agree with your assessment), and the spirit of what has taken place (which is just as much bending the truth as what you says has taken place by Swann, but the it does not bend in favor for interests of the general public). So yes anyone adept can access the information online (the minority as far as population percentage is con…

Right, I agree to an extent with that assessment. It would, in my mind, be more agreeable to say that the 24 hr news cycle was negligent and in dereliction of their duties as members of the free press to not report the story simply in the scope that it wouldn't generate enough viewers as, say, the Bieber thing. I don't believe there's complicity between the press and the US Govt which was (I believe) implied in the a…

That's fair. At least in our discussion we have shown that the situation is more nuanced than it appears at first glance because of many of the underlying facets involved.

In the end, it comes down to actions by individuals or groups of individuals to make things as they are and how they will be.

Myself, being aware of what more or less has been going on prior the Snowden leaks from previous wistleblowers and from previous events in history that set a precedent of the actions individuals/corporations/governments are willing to take with whatever capabilities available under such perceived or actual circumstances, I have decided on what role I want to take (and get hate mail for every day because I guess it's easier to send feedback to a company on what they're doing as opposed to criticizing one's government for doing the same thing in the shadows).

Re: US Media Blacks Out Snowden Interview

#176

Post by foobarqux »

foobarqux wrote: post #150
jobu wrote: post #129

Occam's Razor - Which is more likely? 1) The US government has persuaded major media outlets CNN, FOX, MSNBC, NYT, etc. to bury the interview. 2) The German media company that did the inteview is asking foreign news outlets for more money than they're willing to pay for the interview (and is protecting its copyright by having internet copies taken down).

That isn't how western government influences media in it's own country. Media know that the US government would be very unhappy about a certain story and they know that the US government is powerful and has carrots and sticks at its disposal. Who is going to poke the bear?

See also:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BxdSgLmez5Q&t=33m31s

Re: US Media Blacks Out Snowden Interview

#177

Post by knice »

tptacek wrote: post #153

Reddit takedown of this stupid blog post: http://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/1wddfp/us_media_bl... Of course, on the Internet, it's not Occam's Razor that controls, but Godwin's, which states that among competing hypotheses, the hypothesis with the greatest dramatic implications must be selected.

I don't think your definition of Godwin's Law matches its stated definition. However, I want your definition to get forked into its own law because it is an incredibly astute observation.

Re: US Media Blacks Out Snowden Interview

#178

Post by foobarqux »

srl wrote: post #174
foobarqux wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regardless of whether it is front page material in some objective sense, do you think that if this were a Chinese or Russian dissident it would have gotten more play?

No. I've never seen an interview with a Chinese or Russian dissident be particularly prominent.

Mikhail Khodorkovsky received fairly prominent coverage recently, as an example.

Re: US Media Blacks Out Snowden Interview

#179

Post by coldtea »

nisdec wrote: post #128
coldtea wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4x38jkFlPeg

No available in my country.

Re: US Media Blacks Out Snowden Interview

#180

Post by coldtea »

pavanky wrote: post #137
coldtea wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, read it. Brief mentions, parts taken out of the context? That's supposed to NOT be a blackout? This is one of the most discussed persons in America, a "national hero" to some, a "threat" to others, and they don't care to show the full interview itself? They sure know how to milk other topics 24/7, with repeat showing, panels discussing them, etc...

Call it lackluster coverage like someone else in the comments. Calling it a blackout is hyperbolic and wrong.

"Lackluster coverage" is just another word for blackout.

It's not like what's important makes the news -- or that media are free to play whatever they like.

Post reply on HN