21–30 of 137 posts
If we are critical of Trump's lies, and expect media to fact-check Trump's statements, I suppose that we should likewise morally expect media to fact check CIA statements (with a track record of false statements), as opposed to the behavior that Greenwald is criticizing here, i.e. spreading and exaggerating their statements.
It seems it’s a very corrupt institution and probably always has been. For a while there they made people believe them to be the “fourth estate” the defenders of the democratic faith, etc. Sadly, it seems it was all a rouse and a bullshit narrative. They are not defending the constitution in any way. All they care about is whatever happens to be their particular agenda at a particular point in time which may coincide…
Gonna disagree there. I’ve worked with journalists (am not one) and it’s not BS as you seem to suggest.
Today, the MSM is literally fake news that conforms to leftist/DNC dogma. See my other post in this thread for why.
You can see this in the common use of narrative keywords like "no widespread election fraud" and "insurrection" across multiple MSM media properties. Everybody knows there is always election fraud (voters moving to another state and voting in their old state is considered voting fraud by the FEC), but inserting "widespread" in the phrase makes it easy to keep moving the goalpost.
Careful, Greenwald has gone a bit off the rails recently.
Careful, Greenwald has gone a bit off the rails recently.
Why do you say that?
'THE SKY IS FALLING! THE ELITES ARE LYING! THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA ARE IN BED WITH THE ELITES! ONLY I GLENN GREENWALD AM TRUSTWORTHY! BUT THEY ARE TRYING TO DEPLATFORM ME! SHARE LIKE AND SUBSCRIBE LIKE YOUR LIFE DEPENDS ON IT! BWARARARAHWHHWGAG!"
Meanwhile what's his deal? He accuses The Intercept of skullduggery because they dared edit him. Substack is most likely secretly subsidizing him to write there. I see him publish on Conrad "Trump pardoned me after I wrote a nice book about him" Black's NationalPost that the American press is in bed with Biden.
Granted, I am biased: at this point, 2021, populism enrages me like nothing else. Being on the internet feels like I'm trapped in some plonker's smoky dorm room.
The premise is it was Hunter Biden’s laptop. There is no evidence of this. It’s completely impossible there could be a disinformation campaign on such a pedestrian political campaign. /s
What gets me about this is that it's always a "laptop" being discussed. Shouldn't we be discussing a hard drive? Or is the incriminating evidence on the keyboard?!
Careful, Greenwald has gone a bit off the rails recently.
The premise is it was Hunter Biden’s laptop. There is no evidence of this. It’s completely impossible there could be a disinformation campaign on such a pedestrian political campaign. /s
Fox reporters claimed to have obtained the hard drive, then lost it due to conspiracy from the delivery company, then found it, and now refuses to show the contents because Hunter Biden is a down and out man, and it's so sad to kick a remorseful man trying to turn his life around.
This is the story according to Fox, and specifically Tucker Carlson — that we cannot see the evidence because Tucker Carlson feels sorry for Hunter Biden's low fortunes.
Careful, Greenwald has gone a bit off the rails recently.
Why not read the post and cite the parts you find off-the-rails, then?
And I doubt it's fair to say that mathematical error or amateurism makes you "off the rails". Yet Terrence Tao won't give such people the time of day.
What role does Credibility play in conversation?
> As this false claim went massively viral, conservative journalists — and only they — began vocally objecting that the report made no mention whatsoever of the Hunter Biden laptop, let alone supplied proof for this claim.
Greenwald basically invalidates his own argument a few sentences later where he describes how there actually were other journalists such as Chris Hayes who objected to the description of the report. And, again stated by Greenwald, Patrick Tucker himself came around, deleted his initial tweet and posted a clarification.
And just as an aside, the "conservative journalists" cited by Greenwald work for the Daily Caller, described by Wikipedia [1] as:
> The Daily Caller has published false stories on multiple occasions. The website publishes articles that dispute the scientific consensus on climate change. Until 2018, the website had also published articles by white supremacists such as Jason Kessler and Peter Brimelow.
I also find it laughable that he characterizes some journalists as minions of the "liberal corporate media" but The Daily caller, founded by Fox News host Tucker Carlson and Neil Patel, is somehow home to harmless independent "conservative journalists". That Glenn Greenwald tries to sell me journalists of a white supremacist outlet as trustworthy and truthful is not really a good sign in my book.
So while I agree that the initial tweet by Patrick Tucker lead to a falsehood being spread on social media I just can't follow Glenn Greenwald's take of seeing this as a coordinated misinformation operation.