My Resignation from the Intercept • Hacker News Board

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#281

Post by ehsankia » Thu, Oct 29, 2020, 6:49 PM UTC

gfodor wrote: post #125

ehsankia wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please entertain the possibility for a moment, whether you agree with it or not, that this story was indeed planted by a foreign nation for the specific purpose of manipulating our election. Do you then believe that it is responsible to willfully help spread it and blast it all over every social media site? Aren't you doing the foreign nation's bidding then? If you do agree there, then where would you draw the line f…

There was a time when journalists cared about the truth, and what the truth requires is the disclosure of facts and objectivity. The proper way to publish this is to describe the evidence, and the reasons as to why the evidence may be falsified, and do continual reporting as the story develops to keep the public informed how likely or not the information is false. The alternative of suppressing it based upon supposit…

> There was a time when journalists cared about the truth

Which is exactly why no other publication has yet backed up this claim, because they cannot verify the truthiness of it. If anything, it's NYP that did not care about the truth and only about the fact that it would be a "win" for their side.

Caring about the truth and not spreading misinformation from foreign nation is one and the same.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#282

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Oct 29, 2020, 6:49 PM UTC

watermelonhead wrote: post #205

karl11 wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're right that it's not how this works. Media organizations are not interested truth or accuracy of their stories, but simply how many ads and subscriptions the stories can sell. And that's not the say they are motivated by greed - even worse, they are often motivated by missionary-like zeal to promote a cause. So of course it would follow that they have no interest in publishing anything disagreeable to their rea…

Media is completely sold out in the country. A purge is incoming.

[deleted]

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#283

Post by throwaway2048 » Thu, Oct 29, 2020, 6:49 PM UTC

kev_da_dev wrote: post #190

Go look at all the comments being downvoted. It's insane how many reasonable, common-sense arguments are being downvoted into oblivion. HN has a serious astroturfing problem and I can only imagine who's behind it.

I see a lot of boilerplate handwringing about how this is the end of free speech and a reliable media, that kind of stuff gets posted over and over again in every article of this nature.

Its not particularly interesting, or relevant, especially after being repeated ad nauseum.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#284

Post by ehsankia » Thu, Oct 29, 2020, 6:50 PM UTC

int_19h wrote: post #119

ehsankia wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please entertain the possibility for a moment, whether you agree with it or not, that this story was indeed planted by a foreign nation for the specific purpose of manipulating our election. Do you then believe that it is responsible to willfully help spread it and blast it all over every social media site? Aren't you doing the foreign nation's bidding then? If you do agree there, then where would you draw the line f…

What matters is whether the story is true or not, not who planted it. If China digs out more on Trump taxes or business dealings, I'd want to see that, as well.

Right, and it's still not clear whether it is true or not.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#285

Post by happytoexplain » Thu, Oct 29, 2020, 6:50 PM UTC

tpmx wrote: post #32

The first two of the three hours of him being a guest on Joe Rogan yesterday were brilliant. I've never heard someone so eloquently tear down the shiny facades of what passes as high-brow "journalism" these days.

It's romantic, but blind, to paint examples of one's own opinion like this.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#286

Post by padseeker » Thu, Oct 29, 2020, 6:51 PM UTC

Glenn is complaining that he can't discuss a story that the Wall Street Journal also looked into and was unwilling to risk their reputation on a story lacking verifiable evidence. The Wall Street Journal is generally a credible but also right leaning news source. GG's politics are to the left on most of the democratic party, and was unhappy with Clinton and now also unhappy with Biden.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#287

Post by nickysielicki » Thu, Oct 29, 2020, 6:51 PM UTC

happytoexplain wrote: post #275

nickysielicki wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> not simply a desire to "censor" someone they've worked with for years. This reads as though you're implying The Intercept existed independently of Greenwald. They didn't, he co-founded The Intercept . He ought to (and I imagine, he does) have seniority on any editor. I think it speaks volumes about him as a journalist and his journalistic integrity that he setup The Intercept as an outlet where he and his co-founde…

That's an incredibly low bar for praise.

Only if you choose to be blind to the relationship between most "journalism" outlets, their owners, and the types of stories they publish.

If you don't think Bezos influences what WaPo writes, or that Murdoch influences what Fox writes, indirectly or directly, you're not looking hard enough.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#288

Post by IshKebab » Thu, Oct 29, 2020, 6:52 PM UTC

umvi wrote: post #49

m52go wrote: post #12

What happens when Glenn fails to conform to Substack's standards? To my knowledge Substack hasn't censored yet, but it's inevitable. Glenn should just start his own site, in my opinion.

Hosted with whom? Some private company no doubt that could be pressured to censor if a big enough twitterstorm came along.

Ultimately you just need to own a domain. You have to get pretty damn extreme before domains are confiscated.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#289

Post by haberman » Thu, Oct 29, 2020, 6:52 PM UTC

happytoexplain wrote: post #257

haberman wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In this thread I am seeing both "this story is already running non-stop on Fox, there's no censorship", and "if the editors didn't censor this, it would poison the election, and that's too big of a risk."

Ignoring the mischaracterization of the two points, what are you trying to say? That those two thoughts are not allowed to exist in the same "group" of people, for some definition of "group"?

The rationale for censorship of Greenwald's article is unconvincing, as that rationale is contradicted even by other people who agree with the censorship.

As the story is already running elsewhere, it is unconvincing that there is a pressing need for this particular outlet to suppress it.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#290

Post by meowface » Thu, Oct 29, 2020, 6:52 PM UTC

dkural wrote: post #242

meowface wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're assuming it's a garbage story and that it's intended to influence the election based on absolutely nothing. Why not make counter-arguments to the actual piece, when it comes out? I'd argue that all of the rampant censorship about any conceivable questioning or criticism of Biden is the thing that history is likely going to look back on in a few months, and perhaps years, as unethical and irresponsible journali…

You're already buying into the propaganda - there is nothing to "cover-up" per se, there can't be a cover-up, because there is nothing to cover up, there is no story. Imagine multiple media outlets simultaneously get an email saying "Meowface denies being Dogface during the night". If someone refuses to print this, due lack of evidence and lack of truth - that is not called a cover-up. There is no reason to dignify i…

I may very well turn out to be wrong, but I think the emails are more likely than not all real. But even if they all turn out to be completely doctored, there's a much more responsible way of handling the information. Of course it'd be absurd to assume the emails are real, but it's almost as absurd to assume they can't be real and that to even attempt to objectively assess the claim is falling for propaganda.

This is a true Shiri's scissor, here. The left-leaning journalists who recognize, in my opinion, how ridiculous this behavior is vs. the rest are basically living on different planets.