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

671–680 of 1001 posts

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#671

Post by Bhilai »

lordnacho wrote: post #316
gfodor wrote: post #6

The media has fallen into the well-known trap of optimizing the wrong KPI. You want to maximize trust with the public, not engagement, if you want your media company to survive if its value proposition is providing journalism and the usual benefits that come with a free press. Unfortunately, not only is engagement the wrong metric, but it's also one which incentivizes the undermining of the actual metric you need to…

This is why the Economist, FT and the WSJ still have a somewhat positive reputation. They're expensive and tend to write about things that are important, not sensational. All other publications are slowly falling victim to the parametdynamicser of the entertainment game, including ones that were also in that bracket not long ago. Mind you I'm not saying WaPo and NYT are trash now, they did start with a high rep and t…

WSJ has pretty biased opinion section though where they have almost no standards.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#672

Post by babesh »

jiveturkey wrote: post #442
gfodor wrote: post #6

The media has fallen into the well-known trap of optimizing the wrong KPI. You want to maximize trust with the public, not engagement, if you want your media company to survive if its value proposition is providing journalism and the usual benefits that come with a free press. Unfortunately, not only is engagement the wrong metric, but it's also one which incentivizes the undermining of the actual metric you need to…

> The media has fallen into the well-known trap of optimizing the wrong KPI. You want to maximize trust with the public, not engagement, if you want your media company to survive if its value proposition is providing journalism and the usual benefits that come with a free press. That's a big 'if'. The 'media's value prop is not to promote a free press. Those that believe that to be the case are quickly going extinct.…

That hasn’t worked recently. Look at NPR. It’s been captured.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#673

Post by chiph »

I hate to see this, as I've been following Glenn since the Snowden affair and remember the start of The Intercept. But what strikes me is that this is the difference between being a founder, and being an owner. An owner, of even a (non-trivial) minority percentage, would have had a very different relationship with the editors and would have had significant influence on the publication's policies.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#674

Post by tptacek »

bigdict wrote: post #663
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…

Matt Taibbi: https://taibbi.substack.com/p/glenn-greenwald-on-his-resigna...

Those two deserve each other.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#675

Post by brown9-2 »

pvarangot wrote: post #634
brown9-2 wrote: post #628

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The facts all rely on a hard drive no one has seen and no one will offer forensic evidence of

Who saw the hard drive and forensic evidence for stuff like the Panama Paper or the DNC emails? I'm asking seriously because on Glenn's article he says that the Hunter emails have gone through scrutiny similar to the material from previous hacks or leaks, and he makes a really solid case with examples of how each dump was "verified". Also does the Biden campaign has seen or have forensic evidence about this being for…

Greenwald writes:

> it is clear to me that the trove of documents from Hunter Biden’s emails has been verified in ways quite similar to those.

and then he doesn’t really explain how he came to this conclusion or the specific ways that it has been verified - he just asserts that others have verified it, and he trusts them.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#676

Post by ciarannolan »

jessaustin wrote: post #645
ciarannolan wrote: post #369

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

The reason I said "at least trust somewhat" instead of just "trust" is because your comment is so predictable and played out that I thought I might be able to save everyone the time. Guess not!

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#677

Post by jessaustin »

nightowl_games wrote: post #95
1980phipsi wrote: post #29

Is there anything worth reading by the Intercept excepting Greenwald?

I've been following Zaid Jilani. https://theintercept.com/staff/zaidjilani/

I didn't see any articles at that link written in the last two years. I did find a more recent one by the same author elsewhere. [0] I'm not sure if I'm allowed to read anything at that site...

[0] https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-1619-pr...

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#678

Post by juniper_strong »

lordnacho wrote: post #316
gfodor wrote: post #6

The media has fallen into the well-known trap of optimizing the wrong KPI. You want to maximize trust with the public, not engagement, if you want your media company to survive if its value proposition is providing journalism and the usual benefits that come with a free press. Unfortunately, not only is engagement the wrong metric, but it's also one which incentivizes the undermining of the actual metric you need to…

This is why the Economist, FT and the WSJ still have a somewhat positive reputation. They're expensive and tend to write about things that are important, not sensational. All other publications are slowly falling victim to the parametdynamicser of the entertainment game, including ones that were also in that bracket not long ago. Mind you I'm not saying WaPo and NYT are trash now, they did start with a high rep and t…

I've stopped caring about institutions' reputations because I don't need them to gatekeep for me anymore.

If I want to read about finance, I can read Matt Levine. If I want to read about law I can read Eugene Volokh. If I want to read about about security I can read Bruce Schneier. In every category I care about, there are writers who are experts who make their expert opinions known without me having to subscribe to the Economist, FT, or the WSJ, all of which are great, all of which I grew up reading.

But I think I'm done with their gatekeeping now, I don't need it.

WaPo and NYT are trash and that was made nakedly obvious in 2016. It's more blatant now than it was then, but I guess if you didn't notice it then, you won't notice it now.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#679

Post by babesh »

ehsankia wrote: post #231
__blockcipher__ wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Take a minute to step back. What do you think is more probable. That every single news organization out there, every single journalist, including NPR as you mention, are trying to hide this very real story and are wrong, while the one publication is in the right. Or that maybe, just maybe, it's the other way around and NYP published something that has not been well vetted?

What an idiotic statement. You could have said the exact same thing about the second Iraqi war. Also the conservative media is jumping all over this. Perhaps it’s only the media that you choose to believe.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#680

Post by jacobolus »

marcusverus wrote: post #411
ggggtez wrote: post #346

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Here’s what his own (ex-) colleagues say:

> 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.

https://theintercept.com/2020/10/29/glenn-greenwald-resigns-...

Post reply on HN