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

781–790 of 1001 posts

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#781

Post by prawn »

zaroth wrote: post #775
prawn wrote: post #714

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you see them make that demand? Their wording that he published implied that it would be detrimental to The Intercept, which would be a fair claim. I think you can suggest it was careful pressure or negotiation, but it didn't read as a demand to me.

Language like that is setting up the basis for a lawsuit. It’s absolutely a demand not to publish it elsewhere. In fact it’s a thinly veiled threat if he does. You have to read this knowing there is an existing contractural agreement that Glenn is expressly allowed to publish elsewhere if they do not publish. So the only basis to stop him from doing that would be to allege it would be “damaging” if he did.

If he's confident in his reading of the contractual agreement, what's the issue?

My read of the comment was as a negotiating point - they want to encourage a result but not make a legal demand. i.e., he can just ignore it if he doesn't have any consideration for The Intercept brand that they share.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#782

Post by Cheezemansam »

joe_the_user wrote: post #764
zaroth wrote: post #751

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is an op-ed and was supposed to be published by the Intercept as an op-ed... The NY Times reports; > In a phone interview, Mr. Greenwald said he had received emails from Intercept editors outlining what the publication would allow and not allow in his article. “My arrangement with The Intercept since it began is my opinion pieces are not edited by anyone,” he said.

Sure and as an op-ed, the journal itself makes a decision whether it wants to front that opinion. The journal has stopped being close to Mr. Greenwald's perspective. Sure, maybe they changed the rules on him since it had become their publication. But that's a King Lear story, not a journalism story. "You broke your promise that I'd have unlimited publication rights" is a sad story of broken promises but it's not a st…

"You broke your promise that I'd have unlimited publication rights" is a sad story of broken promises but it's not a story of journalistic decline.

Sure, but that isn't the central issue here that Greenwald is claiming.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#783

Post by harry8 »

BLKNSLVR wrote: post #750
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…

Australian journalist Emma Alberici[0] was eventually forced out of the national broadcaster the ABC due primarily to a single article she wrote that was critical of the Government's economic policies, pointing to historic evidence that the policies being pursued were ineffective against the problem the Government were attempting to solve.[1][2]. There are strong implications that the ABC was pressured into editing t…

How many corrections did Emma Alberici end up publishing on that one piece?

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#784

Post by ilikehurdles »

mlindner wrote: post #646
r721 wrote: post #405

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

If anything she's defending her staff from baseless attacks of a disgruntled former coworker.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#785

Post by Alex3917 »

reaperducer wrote: post #361
jrochkind1 wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the general sense, it's not a new problem. One of the main points I got from Chomsky & Herman's _Manufacturing Consent_ (1988, analyzing news from a decade earlier), is that journalists print what the government says because it's convenient -- it's less work to print what the government (or anyone else) says at a press conference than to do your own research -- AND even when it comes to privately given info, becau…

Chomsky & Herman's _Manufacturing Consent_ (1988, analyzing news from a decade earlier), While it may be good work, it's so out of date it's useless as a tool for evaluating the media landscape of today. I spent 20 years as a journalist and can tell you from first-hand experience and the contacts I have kept in the industry that the media today is not the same as the media of 2010, or 2000, or 1990, and certainly not…

> While it may be good work, it's so out of date it's useless as a tool for evaluating the media landscape of today.

Then where are all the labor and communist newspapers? Seems like nothing much has changed to me.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#786

Post by refurb »

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?

Were you around for the early 2000's Iraq War? Because that's exactly what happened.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#787

Post by ilikehurdles »

Someone pretty familiar with Greenwald posted a pretty thorough, point-by-point takedown of the piece he wanted The Intercept to publish, and ended up publishing himself: https://twitter.com/emptywheel/status/1321923054499495938?s=...

Frankly, if you read his original piece, it's exhaustingly shoddy. To say he needs an editor is putting it lightly.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#788

Post by refurb »

CogentHedgehog wrote: post #499
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.

My impression was the opposite. Greenwald went around slinging wild accusations of censorship and bias, and the Intercept's response was fairly measured in comparison. They even included an acknowledgement of respect for his work.

Huh. I saw Glenn's response as pretty measured, except for the follow up after his first email where he gets a bit heated.

I thought his point by point rebuttal was pretty effective - he basically said "if you think my allegations aren't tempered enough, then suggest how to temper them further, don't just remove them entirely".

Again, it's the two-faced approach the media is taking. Rumor about Trump gets front page coverage, then someone asks about sources and you realize there are none. Try the same with Biden and you get "there is no story here. all disinformation".

Why two standards for two different leaders?

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#789

Post by wglb »

jccc wrote: post #767
tptacek wrote: post #674

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those two deserve each other.

Please don’t do this here. The HN guidelines make clear the kind of community we’re going for is one that resists provocation toward the uninteresting. In particular: “ Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive. ” “ Please don't sneer. ” “ Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something. ” https://…

I didn't see the comment the way you did, apparently.

In my mind, his comment doesn't go against the guidelines, but yours seems to not presume good faith. He has offered to amplify what he said.

Re: My Resignation from the Intercept

#790

Post by xracy »

elif wrote: post #638
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…

The form of your comment is a continuation of the censorship trend he is referring to. Rather than engage his writing and journalistic perspective by providing your own, you have pigeonholed and dismissed it outright without even reading it. And rather than back up your own argument, you have chosen to attack his character as your support.

1. I don't think you understand the word "censorship". OP of the comment doesn't have the power for it, and Greenwald certainly wasn't censored if everyone is able to read his opinions spearately 2. You don't know that the person didn't read it. That's an unprovable assumption. 3. OP's explaining why the article isn't worth running. This really doesn't amount to a real character attack unless you're new to the internet...
Post reply on HN