3 ms·
>all of them designed to make him appear as a victim, rather than a grown person throwing a tantrum. This line itself sounds far more tantrum-like and childish
by vokep 6y ago
>all of them designed to make him appear as a victim, rather than a grown person throwing a tantrum.
This line itself sounds far more tantrum-like and childish than anything I've seen from Greenwald regarding this.
- noxer 6y agoI would go as far as say its a blatant lie. Nothing he wrote puts him in the victim position at all. He is very aware that he doesn't need them to publish his stuff.
- yorwba 6y ago> What's happening here is obvious: you know that you can't explicitly say you don't want to publish the article because it raises questions about the candidate you and all other TI Editors want very much to win the election in 5 days. So you have to cast your censorship as an accusation -- an outrageous and inaccurate one -- that my article contains factually false claims, all as a pretext for alleging that my article violates The Intercept's lofty editorial standards and that it's being rejected on journalistic grounds rather than nakedly political grounds. ... does sound like he feels victimized.
- noxer 6y agoHe describes what he thinks, is what they did and why. Nothing about that is about him. In this quote it doesn't even matter whos article they didn't wanna publish. The whole quoted part could almost identically be written about someone else article they rejected. The "my article" is the only thing that would need to be changed and its quite obvious that if he cant make them post it no one else would get a similar article to be posted. This is not about him at all and certainly hes not the victim hes the one who attacked "the media" in what he wrote. He certainly was well aware that he asked them to publish something that criticizing themselves and he certainly was also fully aware that if they decline they proof his point. Checkmate for him - not a victim.
- raxxorrax 6y agoI don't think he sees himself as a victim but he is certainly disappointed. I think he is also correct. I think it is a bit of a smear against Biden, but editorial complaints about that sound a bit opportunistic to stay diplomatic.
- threatofrain 6y agoGlenn Greenwald appears to be confirming that the source evidence hasn't been verified and can't be examined by him; further, Tucker Carlson has said that he has evidence yet to be revealed. Sounds like Glenn's colleagues prevented him from engaging in a preliminary bet when no news agencies outside of NY Post and Fox have seen the source evidence. At best Glenn can play second-fiddle to Fox and NY Post, engaging in meta-analysis from afar. At worse, Glenn was betting a decent chunk of his brand's credibility.
- barbacoa 6y agoIt's not like this evidence is being hidden from the rest of the media. Tony Bobulinski held a public press conference where he brought 3 cell phones with text messages for anyone to examine. The whole NYTimes, Washington Post, CNN crowd just refused to show up.