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

My Resignation from the Intercept

greenwald.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 1001 posts

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#411

Post by marcusverus »

ggggtez wrote: post #346
blhack wrote: post #27

Glenn had a 3 hour long conversation on a podcast a few days ago where he laid out the problem really well: Journalists have essentially become socialites. They don't want to publish articles that will rock the boat, because the people they are friends with are the ones that own that boat, invite them to parties, and are a part of their friend groups. The reporting around this story has been absolutely unbelievable t…

It's also the kind of story that can break someone's journalistic career. Even Fox News wouldn't run the story because it wasn't supported by facts. And last I heard, there still has been no concrete evidence of wrongdoing. Tucker Carlson claims that his evidence "got lost in the mail". In the age of the internet, they didn't snap any photos of this so-called proof? There is no "there" there. Just a bunch of internet…

Glenn Greenwald is a Pulitzer prize winning journalist. He broke the Snowden story--another sensational-sounding scoop which likely sounded like total bullshit at first.

Is it possible that Mr. Greenwald is a better judge of whether or not there is a story here?

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#412

Post by [deleted] »

__blockcipher__ wrote: post #191
stumblers wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll have to listen to the podcast, but I think you're way off in thinking this kind of story makes careers. Journalists take their credibility very seriously and this story doesn't have it, at least not yet if it ever will. Going with a story that hasn't been vetted marks a serious journalist as a dupe for the rest of their lives.

You're propagating disinfo - in the real sense of the word, not the modern Orwellian meaning - with this line of criticism. Because this is a story that has absolutely been vetted, but the issue is all of the left-leaning mainstream media (read: literally everyone except parts of Fox News) have absolutely refused to cover this story. Do you really believe if the same story were about a member of the Trump family, tha…

[deleted]

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#413

Post by specialist »

nostromo wrote: post #166
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…

This appears to be correct. Most media outlets now are activists pretending to be journalists, run by businesspeople who care about revenue more than truth.

Our expectations of objectivity (NPOV) is very recent and abnormal.

I'd like many many more Clay Shirky style analysis of print, broadcast, and social media, followed by a 100 crazy notions for novel NPOV organizations.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#414

Post by drewrv »

meowface wrote: post #221
ivalm wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is about emails which have no headers, that are impossible to verify, that were “known to fbi” for a long time but didn’t produce any action (because likely fake), and that are specifically being pushed to change outcome of election despite, again, no real evidence of their veracity.

They should be treated with caution and skepticism, but you seem to be using motivated reasoning without an impartial look of the actual probabilities. There's no hard proof they're real and no hard proof they're doctored. This requires a rigorous analysis, not dismissal.

> There's no hard proof they're real

Assertions made without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#416

Post by moultano »

Here's the response from the Intercept. https://static.theintercept.com/amp/glenn-greenwald-resigns-...

> The narrative Glenn presents about his departure is teeming with distortions and inaccuracies — all of them designed to make him appear as a victim, rather than a grown person throwing a tantrum. It would take too long to point them all out here, but we intend to correct the record in time. For now, it is important to make clear that our goal in editing his work was to ensure that it would be accurate and fair. While he accuses us of political bias, it was he who was attempting to recycle the dubious claims of a political campaign — the Trump campaign — and launder them as journalism.

> We have the greatest respect for the journalist Glenn Greenwald used to be, and we remain proud of much of the work we did with him over the past six years. It is Glenn who has strayed from his original journalistic roots, not The Intercept.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#417

Post by glaring »

kolanos wrote: post #388
bachmeier wrote: post #20

"as a last-ditch attempt to avoid being censored, I encouraged them to air their disagreements with me by writing their own articles that critique my perspectives and letting readers decide who is right" That's not how this works. If the editor concludes that it's a garbage story dropped a few days before the election in an attempt to influence the election, you don't run it and then "let the readers decide who is ri…

> ...garbage story... > I want to be clear that I'm not claiming to know the truth as it relates to this story... Make up your mind.

You are trying to frame these two quotes as being contradictory by leaving out the words preceding the first quote. Why would you do that?

It should read: "If the editor concludes that it's a garbage story..."

Looks like including the entire sentence makes it pretty clear that this isn't a self-contradicting position to take.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#418

Post by cblconfederate »

bachmeier wrote: post #20

"as a last-ditch attempt to avoid being censored, I encouraged them to air their disagreements with me by writing their own articles that critique my perspectives and letting readers decide who is right" That's not how this works. If the editor concludes that it's a garbage story dropped a few days before the election in an attempt to influence the election, you don't run it and then "let the readers decide who is ri…

Maybe ... if this was 1990. This is 2020, they know that their actions will cause a streisand effect. I don't think people are watching mainstream media narratives with bated breath , as most journalists think.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#419

Post by GekkePrutser »

bachmeier wrote: post #20

"as a last-ditch attempt to avoid being censored, I encouraged them to air their disagreements with me by writing their own articles that critique my perspectives and letting readers decide who is right" That's not how this works. If the editor concludes that it's a garbage story dropped a few days before the election in an attempt to influence the election, you don't run it and then "let the readers decide who is ri…

If the article contains the truth and is about some serious misconduct, wouldn't influencing the election be a good thing? This is the very role of journalism. It's important that the public makes a decision based on all the facts.

I can totally see his point with journalistic bias and the money strings. The ideal of independent press has long been dropped, and now we have news agencies of every political denomination. Sometimes it feels like objectivity isn't even a goal anymore.

I'm not a Trump supporter in any way. Still, I do want the truth to be known even if it's about a person I support.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#420

Post by pashamur »

burlesona wrote: post #373

Honest question: is it just me or is it getting harder to determine what is factual and what is not? It seems like the US has begun to splinter such that there are two different sets of "facts" on many issues, but of course that is not how facts work. Nevertheless, when doing research and investigation is it often hard for me to pin down the truth behind any of the "facts" that are thrown at me, whether that's by the…

It's not accidental, that is actually the result of a well-known propaganda technique known as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firehose_of_falsehood
Post reply on HN