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

641–650 of 1001 posts

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#641

Post by k2enemy »

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…

> 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.

Sounds like they are taking the path that academia took.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#642

Post by mthoms »

greenyoda wrote: post #574
shalmanese wrote: post #505

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A right is only useful if you assert that right. If you look at the email chain that Glenn himself published [1], the correspondence is essentially the editor giving a bunch of suggestions of how to improve the article, then Glenn asserting CENSORSHIP and then the EIC telling him to stop being so rude to his colleagues and then Glenn quitting in a huff. Maybe it's possible that all of the implied messages were exactl…

> the correspondence is essentially the editor giving a bunch of suggestions of how to improve the article From the beginning of the first letter: "Overall I think this piece can work best if it is significantly narrowed down to what you first discussed with Betsy — media criticism about liberal journalists not asking Biden the questions he should be asked more forcefully, and why they are failing to do that." In oth…

Absent any other evidence, the quotation:

> "Overall I think this piece can work best if..."

is a suggestion (and a perfectly fine way to start a discussion).

Greenwald might have good reason to believe there's more to it than that based on a perceived history of political bias. But, based solely on the text of the email I'm inclined to give the editor the benefit of the doubt.

As a matter of fact, I was firmly in Greenwalds' camp before reading the email exchange. It does read like a bit of tantrum IMHO. It certainly doesn't scream "censorship".

I concede, said "tantrum" may actually be justified based on history that we aren't privy to, but the raw text of the exchange alone does not paint Mr Greenwald in the best light.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#643

Post by alexilliamson »

spamizbad wrote: post #15
dkdk8283 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exerpt: > refusing to publish it unless I remove all sections critical of Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden

This is the news site that broke the Tara Reade rape allegation against Biden this spring. To me, this makes me think there's more to this story. You have no problem dropping a rape allegation story days after Biden is the presumptive nominee (with numerous follow-up articles), but apparently are "censoring" critical comments about Biden from GG's articles?

I've been doom-scrolling through this cursed page of comments, and this is one of the few salient points I've read. Kudos.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#644

Post by spoopyskelly »

gkoberger wrote: post #3

Greenwald has really fascinated me the past decade. He was on track to being one of the most prolific reporters on the planet, and he has gone really down this weird victimhood "censorship" path. Sometimes it’s legitimate censorship. Other times, your editor is just insisting you don’t spread misinformation.

> your editor is just insisting you don’t spread misinformation.

The misinformation they don't like.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#645

Post by jessaustin »

ciarannolan wrote: post #369
uncoder0 wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The elephant in the room (which Greenwald barely acknowledges in this essay) is that many mainstream news organizations have concluded that the evidence for this story was too weak to publish, and some believe it was fabricated by Russian intelligence. Senate Homeland Security committee and DNI director both said that this was not an issue of foreign disinfo. In addition there is an interview from one of the co-cons…

> Senate Homeland Security committee and DNI director [...] Both of these are partisan, unreliable sources. The DNI used to be a nonpartisan that you could at least trust somewhat. Not anymore.

Anyone, assuming such a person actually exists, who ever "trusted" DNI is a credulous fool. Foisting disastrous falsehoods on the gaslit USA public is the job. The current questionable proposition might be slightly more believable only for the fact that it seems more likely to discourage than to encourage war, which is opposed to the traditional preference of the office.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#646

Post by mlindner »

r721 wrote: post #405
CogentHedgehog wrote: post #64

Keep in mind we're just seeing Greenwald's side of this. It sure sounds like he's trying to paint it a way that makes him look good and the Intercept look bad. Lots of claims of "censorship" etc. I want to hear their side of it as well. My guess is that there's a lot more to this story. My guess is if all his peers thought the claims were not solid enough to publish, there is probably a reason for that -- not simply…

Betsy Reed's statement: https://twitter.com/ErikWemple/status/1321896097099489283 https://theintercept.com/2020/10/29/glenn-greenwald-resigns-...

Betsy Reed making personal attacks and calling him a child making a tantrum doesn't really lend credit to her opinion.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#647

Post by rainonmoon »

marrone12 wrote: post #600
eric_b wrote: post #431

Earlier quoted context omitted.

She attacks him personally without ever refuting any of his points. She hand waves that they will correct the record "in time." Her response is riddled with sensationalist language. I'm gonna go with Greenwald's version of events on this one. This person seems fully compromised.

A friend of mine works at the Intercept and has said that Glenn has been going off the rails for the past half a year and has alienated the entire staff at the Intercept, not just this specific editor. Apparently he's been planning to leave for a while, and from my friend's POV, this is Glenn's way of making himself the martyr and getting good publicity for himself and his patreon.

It seems evident that the relationship has been incredibly tense in their emails over the story. It goes from "here's some suggested edits" to "you clearly don't want to work here"/"I'm quitting" in what feels like seconds.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#648

Post by pvarangot »

mundo wrote: post #639
pvarangot wrote: post #621

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you read his story? It's good, it's serious and it calls out the democrats about some real bullshit like inventing a fake Russian intelligence operation to not respond to allegations that come from the emails. I don't care if a journalist has a paranoid delusion as long as they are doing good writing and due diligence, and Glenn's story has both. He's not the most stable individual and he has made mistakes in the…

I read it, but did not see any new reporting. It makes a bold claim in the lede - "a de facto union of media outlets, Silicon Valley giants and the intelligence community to suppress these stories" and offers no specific evidence for it. It seems like Greenwald's gist is that circumstantial evidence is enough proof - that this story is so obviously important that not covering it prominently is prima facie evidence of…

Yeah I see where you are going and I think Biden is a "clean" candidate corruptionwise, at least as much if not cleaner than Hillary was. That being said I have no doubt he is an accomplice for the US backing corrupt politicians in the Ukraine or other countries.

Also I think accusing Russia of running a disinformation campaign to try to cast doubt on the emails form Hunter is cheap and dangerous, it makes his base more angry for no reason.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#649

Post by TearsInTheRain »

pvarangot wrote: post #621
reilly3000 wrote: post #608

https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/security/how-fake-persona-laid-... This is why the Intercept didn't want to run Glenn's story. FYI this sob story has some precedent: In 2014: "I absolutely refuse to be exiled from my own country for the crime of doing journalism and I'm going to force the issue just on principle. And I think going back for a ceremony like the Polk Awards or other forms of journalistic awards would be a…

Did you read his story? It's good, it's serious and it calls out the democrats about some real bullshit like inventing a fake Russian intelligence operation to not respond to allegations that come from the emails. I don't care if a journalist has a paranoid delusion as long as they are doing good writing and due diligence, and Glenn's story has both. He's not the most stable individual and he has made mistakes in the…

Just posting a link to the story since I didnt see it elsewhere in this thread: https://greenwald.substack.com/p/article-on-joe-and-hunter-b...

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#650

Post by ethanwillis »

rat87 wrote: post #466
marcusverus wrote: post #411

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

It's more likely that Greenwalds colleagues are a better judge

It's more likely that the Church is right about heliocentrism being wrong. They do after all, have more people on their side.

In my opinion this is weak reasoning and it only serves to allow people to cement their minority opinions more. Regardless of whether they're correct or not.

Post reply on HN