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

Alternative facts: How the media failed Julian Assange

harpers.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 355 posts

Re: Alternative facts: How the media failed Julian Assange

#281

Post by JumpCrisscross »

calibas wrote: post #57

There's authoritarianism, where government knows what's best for everyone and keeps secrets to "protect" its citizens. Then there's democracy, where the government is open and honest so the people can make informed decisions on how best to run their government. In my opinion, one of the best ways of identifying an authoritarian is to ask them their opinions on Snowden or Assange.

> one of the best ways of identifying an authoritarian is to ask them their opinions on Snowden or Assange

These are complex situations. If you’re basing your binary judgement of an even-more complex political spectrum (it isn’t really a spectrum) on these cases, your model is mis-tuned. I’m sure, for example, Putin would find both exemplary figures. That doesn’t make him a Solon.

Re: Alternative facts: How the media failed Julian Assange

#282

Post by TheHappyOddish »

fmajid wrote: post #257

There are some signs new Australian PM Albanese has been quietly working to secure the release of Assange, but he is now a broken man after a decade of effective imprisonment and the last few years of torture. The deterrent effect against any would-be whistleblowers has been achieved.

Are you joking? He used it as a talking point during his campaign, now he's hand waving every time he's asked about it.

Please prove me wrong and show me these signs.

Albo's no different to the last 6 who had the job.

Re: Alternative facts: How the media failed Julian Assange

#283

Post by DANmode »

phphphphp wrote: post #128
kerkeslager wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The truth is a narrative. Not all narratives are true, but calling something a narrative doesn't in any way disprove it. Would you like to actually call out anything in Collateral Murder that you think wasn't exposing the truth? I'm old enough to remember Collateral Murder. I'm old enough to remember it's video footage. Of members of the US military murdering people, and laughing about it. You can't dismiss that as "…

I make no claim that collateral murder did not represent a war crime, I make no claim that the release of collateral murder was a bad thing, rather, I am claiming that Julian Assange was never a noble person releasing leaked footage to expose the truth, he was a political performer, creating the narrative that he wanted to create, using leaks as props. Julian Assange had no loyalty to the truth (as has been shown in…

> Julian Assange had no loyalty to the truth (...) cares only for the “truth” when it’s favourable to whatever agenda he has at the point in time.

To what end are these agendas?

Being personally relevant? Paid? If one of these, how is he benefitting from those now?

Surely he'd be expecting his demise,given his knowledge of the organization(s) he shone light on.

We're talking about an ex-hacker type turned political leaker, not a talk news pundit.

There are no shared assumptions about these agendas, besides the narratives he and WL have provided. If you have some assumptions, share them?

Re: Alternative facts: How the media failed Julian Assange

#284

Post by jamincan »

kornhole wrote: post #246
gWPVhyxPHqvk wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was easy to do all that because he actively put his thumb on the scale for the Republicans. > “We believe it would be much better for GOP to win.” https://theintercept.com/2018/02/14/julian-assange-wikileaks...

In context of limiting the amount of war upon the rest of world, it is hard for me to disagree. Although the foreign policy is not much different between the party sides, the Democratic party is historically and continues to be the more war party. Look at the votes for sending $117B to Ukraine. The Democrats voted unanimously for it.

Yes, and famously Roosevelt sent aid to and eventually joined Allied forces in Europe instead of being an uncompromising advocate for peace.

Re: Alternative facts: How the media failed Julian Assange

#285

Post by 93po »

actionfromafar wrote: post #279
93po wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The entire "had sex with a broken condom" saga is ridiculous and built up to be an Assange smear campaign. Neither women went to the police to report a rape, they only wanted him to get tested for STDs, neither wanted charges pressed against Assange, and they both later retracted their stories. If Assange did what was alleged, then that's awful and horrible and abusive and those women are victims. However the entiret…

As long as we remember both things can be true at once.

Yes

Re: Alternative facts: How the media failed Julian Assange

#286

Post by yclept »

kornhole wrote: post #215
mhh__ wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

WikiLeaks arguably helped people to do that quite effectively. They've never really claimed to be neutral but especially around 2016 they were either getting played by or explicitly choosing to aid the trump campaign via the Russian state (at best as a messenger). III.B.3 of the Mueller report I don't know if they are evil but I find it very hard to view them as anything other than selectively truthful at best.

That is part of the false narrative you and many were fed and believed. Assange repeatedly explained that documents you are referring to were leaked from someone inside and alluded without exposing that the source could have been Seth Rich who was shot in the street.

That is part of the false narrative you and many were fed and believed. Investigations, reporting from many parties, and the vicitm's own family weigh against this drivel.

Re: Alternative facts: How the media failed Julian Assange

#287

Post by kornhole »

namdnay wrote: post #262
kornhole wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In context of limiting the amount of war upon the rest of world, it is hard for me to disagree. Although the foreign policy is not much different between the party sides, the Democratic party is historically and continues to be the more war party. Look at the votes for sending $117B to Ukraine. The Democrats voted unanimously for it.

I think the point of the Ukraine aid is to limit the amount of war being waged on the Ukrainians...

Then why has Biden never had any talks with Putin to help broker peace talks, and why did the US and UK block the agreement brokered by former Israeli PM Bennet between Russia and Ukraine?

Re: Alternative facts: How the media failed Julian Assange

#288

Post by giantrobot »

93po wrote: post #239
BashiBazouk wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought the disillusionment around here with wikileaks had more to do with the way they had changed from careful curation, removing the personal information of those not involved, to just bulk dumps. Less that Hillary's emails were leaked and more that the personal information of lesser figures in and donors to the DNC were also released in mass. They had changed in perception from journalism to personal revenge ag…

> removing the personal information of those not involved, to just bulk dumps. This is often repeated anti-WL propaganda that isn't true. There is a vast amount of effort that goes into censoring leaks and it's by far the most time consuming part of the process. They spend literally months on it. Just because they chose not to censor something that you would have preferred for them to censor doesn't mean a tremendous…

> It wouldn't serve them at all to refuse.

Because WikiLeaks had become the Julian Assange show and published releases based on his whims. The DNC e-mails hurt his "enemies" while RNC e-mails did not.

Re: Alternative facts: How the media failed Julian Assange

#289

Post by giantrobot »

kornhole wrote: post #287
namdnay wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the point of the Ukraine aid is to limit the amount of war being waged on the Ukrainians...

Then why has Biden never had any talks with Putin to help broker peace talks, and why did the US and UK block the agreement brokered by former Israeli PM Bennet between Russia and Ukraine?

As we've seen since 2014, Russian "peace" overtures are "give us everything and you get nothing". They've also repeatedly proven that they won't honor agreements. They unilaterally broke the Minsk accords just last year with their invasion of Ukraine.

There's no utility in "peace" talks with a dishonest party. All it does is provide the dishonest party with ammunition for propaganda. When the other side balls at their ridiculous demands they run to the press with "look how unreasonable the other side is being!"

Re: Alternative facts: How the media failed Julian Assange

#290

Post by lmm »

phphphphp wrote: post #128
kerkeslager wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The truth is a narrative. Not all narratives are true, but calling something a narrative doesn't in any way disprove it. Would you like to actually call out anything in Collateral Murder that you think wasn't exposing the truth? I'm old enough to remember Collateral Murder. I'm old enough to remember it's video footage. Of members of the US military murdering people, and laughing about it. You can't dismiss that as "…

I make no claim that collateral murder did not represent a war crime, I make no claim that the release of collateral murder was a bad thing, rather, I am claiming that Julian Assange was never a noble person releasing leaked footage to expose the truth, he was a political performer, creating the narrative that he wanted to create, using leaks as props. Julian Assange had no loyalty to the truth (as has been shown in…

Everyone has an agenda, even if that agenda is only that they want to think of themselves as a moral person. What matters is whether the person's actions are good or bad.

> Julian Assange had no loyalty to the truth (as has been shown in the years since) and cares only for the “truth” when it’s favourable to whatever agenda he has at the point in time.

He published the truth and spent over a decade in confinement for it. Isn't that enough?

Post reply on HN