3 ms·
I am not sure why Ames/Levine immediately dismiss anything linked to The Intercept or Skahill or Greenwald. Actually I do know why, Ames has decided anything t
by invid_regent 10y ago
I am not sure why Ames/Levine immediately dismiss anything linked to The Intercept or Skahill or Greenwald. Actually I do know why, Ames has decided anything touched by The Intercept's backer, the founder of Ebay, is tainted since Omidyar funded a group that had the same interests as Soros in Ukraine, also he tried to destroy Craigslist, plus he funds microloans. There's some evidence to support microloans cause a lot more harm than good in 3rd world countries.
It's difficult to keep all of the threads straight! Ames has a good memory and keeps grudges for a long time. Maybe forever.
Ames and John Dolan do an excellent podcast
https://www.patreon.com/radiowarnerd https://www.patreon.com/radiowarnerd
You can find links to episodes they've made freely available in the tweets https://twitter.com/TheWarNerd https://twitter.com/TheWarNerd
Ames and Levine are mad that Omidyar pays Greenwald and Scahill handsomely.
The rivalry and petty tweeting between them (it's mostly Ames vs... everyone) is sad, I enjoy the journalistic output of Scahill AND Ames and I think they should be friends!
- richierocks 10y agoThe main argument against The Intercept is a technical journalistic point. It's very good practise at a news organisation for investors to have zero editorial control. This is especially necessary for investigative journalism, since the main aim is to dig dirt. The Intercept doesn't have this - Pierre Omidyar has influence over what gets published. That makes it difficult (probably impossible) to publish stories that reflect Omidyar or his business interests in a negative light. For contrast, note how Pando has publically attacked its own investor Peter Thiel over his secret funding of the Hulh Hogan/Gawker lawsuit.