9 ms·

Joe Rogan Experience #1556 – Glenn Greenwald

107 points by remarkEon 6y ago

trollied 6y ago
He’s also done the Lex Fridman podcast this week. His sudden appearance on two high profile podcasts seems eerily convenient, almost as if they were timed to coincide with his planned resignation.
- macinjosh 6y ago
  No, really? Public figures go on media outlets when they have something to talk about!? /s The man is going off on his own as an independent journalist of course he is going to promote himself.
- MisterBastahrd 6y ago
  He's doing the same hissy-fit resignation nonsense that Bari Weiss and Andrew Sullivan did. There's a lot more money to be made by charging people directly without having an editor to tell you to validate your claims and cut out your editorialized nonsense than there is as an actual journalist. He wants to be the Perez Hilton of politics. He cut his teeth in the business with opinion blogs, got his big break precisely because people felt comfortable leaking things to him BECAUSE of his opinion pieces, and has never been comfortable just reporting news.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
syspec 6y ago
I enjoy most JRE episodes, this one as well. However the one thing I do not get is how he is always complaining about CNN not reporting this or how nytimes is practiced bad journalism going so far as to call cnn fake news, but he never discusses Fox News which is actually the most popular news network by far (record profits this year if 1.5B) and the most obviously bias. It really weakens his position, and paints him as only a pseudo centrist
- paulpauper 6y ago
  I think it is implied that he thinks both are bad
- originalvichy 6y ago
  I’m not from the US but I can see that this is yet another effect of two-party politics rotting your country. Centrists and pseudo-centrists are giving outright lies more weight by trying to be ”balanced and not biased”. Giving weight to someone’s lies just because they are led to believe that truth is always in the middle. This leaves all editorial responsibility to the reader. And when the reader sees that a media source is not publishing a story that they are violating their responsibility to give the unfiltered ”truth” to the masses so that they can decide its truthiness. A media source not being just a printer of statements beccomes a weakness. The internet has a lot to do with this since the value of editorial practices does not exist online in the same sense. Bots and blue-checkmark-people give any story validity on twitter.
  - sampo 6y ago
    > I’m not from the US but I can see that this is yet another effect of two-party politics rotting your country. United States is perhaps the oldest continuously existing democracy [0], in has existed 244 years, and most of that time (about 200 years) it has been a two-party system. I don't think it's the two-party system that is responsible for the rotting now. Something else is going on. [0] Well, we can debate how to define a democracy (an interesting and educational debate), and who is oldest still existing depends on the definition. But a good case can be made that it's the US.
    - chme 6y ago
      > Something else is going on. Money in politics probably as well.
    - mellosouls 6y ago
      Very debatable. Democratic traditions in other countries long predate even the existence of the US; it wasn't the first with universal suffrage; it had a troubled history even after that till at least the 1960s, even before we get to any contemporary problems. I don't know there is a legitimate claimant on the "first democracy" title, or even if we are there yet, but unlikely the US.
doublejay1999 6y ago
also platforms alex jones, so it's a nope from me, john.
- xupybd 6y ago
  He gets stoned and laughs as Alex's crazy rants. I don't think he is giving any legitimacy to him so I don't have any issue with that.
- zimbatm 6y ago
  We have limited time available so I understand that simplistic heuristic. But it's just one episode over 1556. One of the nice aspect of these long form discussions is that you get to see a lot more of the guest's psyche and how they think. Obviously it takes a lot more time than to read pre-baked opinions in articles. In the case of the Alex Jones episode, he really does come off as a lunatic. I remember that episode being mildly entertaining due to the guest's personality and fairly low in terms of intellectual content. Watching it didn't suddenly make me wear tinfoil hats or believing in chem-trails.
  - dgrin91 6y ago
    Minor nit: I think he's had Alex on for 3 episodes. I've only seen the latest (1556), but he spends a great deal of time walking through Alex's claims with Alex and showing whats real vs whats a stretch vs whats total BS. It is interesting to see how Alex starts jumping from what we all read to gay frogs. Also if you ignore the politics and real world repercussions of Alex, he is hilarious in an absurdist way.
    - zimbatm 6y ago
      Thanks for the correction. A thing I also remember is that Alex would tend to jump into deeper conspiracy land when pressed with details. Almost like a defense mechanism. It's exactly that kind of thing that makes the interview worthy. Alex is taken out of the rant machine that he created and doesn't control all the interactions. And then we can make our mind about him ourselves. It's more healthy like that than being told what to think.
op03 6y ago
Glenn Greenwald needs an achievable goal otherwise all that persistence and energy he has is going to be squandered. Lot of it has been already. His frustrations have been building, if not overflowing, and social media just enjoys/encourages the wastage of those energies. Sad to watch.
paulpauper 6y ago
Much of his criticism is focused on the overreach of the US government, but another problem is private sector having too much control , such as tech censorship. The private sector, unlike the public sector, has far fewer avenues for redress of wrongs. try restoring a terminated reddit, fakebook, twitter or YouTube account. The public sector at least has some accountability, which you do not see in the private sector. Civil lawsuits are very expensive, arbitration is not that effective, etc.
- inglor_cz 6y ago
  It took our ancestors a lot of time and effort to build redress avenues into governments. I think we have to do the same with Big Tech. And the Divine Right of Kings absolutist party has made a comeback in the "they are private companies, why dont you start your own Google" crowd.
hhas01 6y ago
Rogan is a shameless grifter. JRE #1555 was with Alex Jones, a man who shits on murdered kids for money. So what does this have to do with tech, other than its abuse? Frontpage material, my ass.
- hhas01 6y ago
  Dear downvoters: I have points to spare. What you don’t have is an argument.
  - hhas01 6y ago
    Or, clearly, any appreciation of irony.
hluska 6y ago
This isn’t entirely on topic with this thread, but I’ve been shocked by HN’s base reaction to this article. Calling reasonable edits censorship is akin to calling a code review censorship, yet who among us doesn’t participate in code reviews??? Greenwald was not censored, rather he refused to be edited. That’s not journalism, that’s a personality cult. “Journalism” only works when journalists and editors work together - journalists go off, get excited and follow a story; editors keep them connected to publishable truth and article sized bits of context. Speaking as a former publisher who has edited my share of complex pieces, Greenwald’s original article was poor. He had, I believe 2k words to tell a story, but he chose the wrong 2k words.
- testrun 6y ago
  Wrong according to whom?
- neilsense 6y ago
  Not sure how your team is doing code-reviews, but they shouldn't be changing the message of the PR, rather just help clean it up.
  - tmotwu 6y ago
    It's misleading to say the editor was asking to change the message. The opposite: it's clear to me Greenwald did not clearly communicate the intended narrative of his piece, so the editors thought the article lacked focus. It's like telling Greenwald, hey you added functionality that was not originally part of the design doc. That's fine and all but now test coverage is diminished. Heres a few tests to consider so you could strengthen the robustness of the code. To say editors were overstepping their bounds is silly. Greenwald went on a morning show yesterday morning. He admits his journalistic philosophy is unconventional; he started off as a blog and was recruited into media. That's fine. I build a few side projects in my free time and I love it because there's so much freedom on how to structure your code. Greenwald feels the same way about writing his pieces, so he will feel right at home in the blogger universe.
    - 6y ago
evgen 6y ago
Two frauds, one show.
hintymad 6y ago
Wow! I can understand that people downvote this post. But flagging it? It really shows who you are. Anything that challenges your narrative must be gone. Now I get it.
- LockAndLol 6y ago
  Is there a way to unflag it like "counter flag" or something? Is Glen Greenwald really that controversial on HackerNews? I thought that this crowd would be most receptive to him after he helped Snowden expose the egregious misconduct of the U.S government. What is going on with this community?
  - hintymad 6y ago
    The left (not the liberal, mind you) has moralized everything. So, they naturally want to censor aany opinion that does not agree with their view. It is, after all, for our own good, and it is only the left who can define what good means.
- apta 6y ago
  That's the far left for you. They claim to be the manifestation of anti-facism, yet we see the full ostracizing and "cancelling" of anyone who dares hold a different opinion.

107 points by remarkEon 6y ago

He’s also done the Lex Fridman podcast this week. His sudden appearance on two high profile podcasts seems eerily convenient, almost as if they were timed to coincide with his planned resignation.

macinjosh 6y ago
No, really? Public figures go on media outlets when they have something to talk about!? /s The man is going off on his own as an independent journalist of course he is going to promote himself.
MisterBastahrd 6y ago
He's doing the same hissy-fit resignation nonsense that Bari Weiss and Andrew Sullivan did. There's a lot more money to be made by charging people directly without having an editor to tell you to validate your claims and cut out your editorialized nonsense than there is as an actual journalist. He wants to be the Perez Hilton of politics. He cut his teeth in the business with opinion blogs, got his big break precisely because people felt comfortable leaking things to him BECAUSE of his opinion pieces, and has never been comfortable just reporting news.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

syspec 6y ago

I enjoy most JRE episodes, this one as well. However the one thing I do not get is how he is always complaining about CNN not reporting this or how nytimes is practiced bad journalism going so far as to call cnn fake news, but he never discusses Fox News which is actually the most popular news network by far (record profits this year if 1.5B) and the most obviously bias. It really weakens his position, and paints him as only a pseudo centrist

paulpauper 6y ago
I think it is implied that he thinks both are bad
originalvichy 6y ago
I’m not from the US but I can see that this is yet another effect of two-party politics rotting your country. Centrists and pseudo-centrists are giving outright lies more weight by trying to be ”balanced and not biased”. Giving weight to someone’s lies just because they are led to believe that truth is always in the middle. This leaves all editorial responsibility to the reader. And when the reader sees that a media source is not publishing a story that they are violating their responsibility to give the unfiltered ”truth” to the masses so that they can decide its truthiness. A media source not being just a printer of statements beccomes a weakness. The internet has a lot to do with this since the value of editorial practices does not exist online in the same sense. Bots and blue-checkmark-people give any story validity on twitter.
- sampo 6y ago
  > I’m not from the US but I can see that this is yet another effect of two-party politics rotting your country. United States is perhaps the oldest continuously existing democracy [0], in has existed 244 years, and most of that time (about 200 years) it has been a two-party system. I don't think it's the two-party system that is responsible for the rotting now. Something else is going on. [0] Well, we can debate how to define a democracy (an interesting and educational debate), and who is oldest still existing depends on the definition. But a good case can be made that it's the US.
  - chme 6y ago
    > Something else is going on. Money in politics probably as well.
  - mellosouls 6y ago
    Very debatable. Democratic traditions in other countries long predate even the existence of the US; it wasn't the first with universal suffrage; it had a troubled history even after that till at least the 1960s, even before we get to any contemporary problems. I don't know there is a legitimate claimant on the "first democracy" title, or even if we are there yet, but unlikely the US.

doublejay1999 6y ago

also platforms alex jones, so it's a nope from me, john.

xupybd 6y ago
He gets stoned and laughs as Alex's crazy rants. I don't think he is giving any legitimacy to him so I don't have any issue with that.
zimbatm 6y ago
We have limited time available so I understand that simplistic heuristic. But it's just one episode over 1556. One of the nice aspect of these long form discussions is that you get to see a lot more of the guest's psyche and how they think. Obviously it takes a lot more time than to read pre-baked opinions in articles. In the case of the Alex Jones episode, he really does come off as a lunatic. I remember that episode being mildly entertaining due to the guest's personality and fairly low in terms of intellectual content. Watching it didn't suddenly make me wear tinfoil hats or believing in chem-trails.
- dgrin91 6y ago
  Minor nit: I think he's had Alex on for 3 episodes. I've only seen the latest (1556), but he spends a great deal of time walking through Alex's claims with Alex and showing whats real vs whats a stretch vs whats total BS. It is interesting to see how Alex starts jumping from what we all read to gay frogs. Also if you ignore the politics and real world repercussions of Alex, he is hilarious in an absurdist way.
  - zimbatm 6y ago
    Thanks for the correction. A thing I also remember is that Alex would tend to jump into deeper conspiracy land when pressed with details. Almost like a defense mechanism. It's exactly that kind of thing that makes the interview worthy. Alex is taken out of the rant machine that he created and doesn't control all the interactions. And then we can make our mind about him ourselves. It's more healthy like that than being told what to think.

op03 6y ago

Glenn Greenwald needs an achievable goal otherwise all that persistence and energy he has is going to be squandered. Lot of it has been already. His frustrations have been building, if not overflowing, and social media just enjoys/encourages the wastage of those energies. Sad to watch.

paulpauper 6y ago

Much of his criticism is focused on the overreach of the US government, but another problem is private sector having too much control , such as tech censorship. The private sector, unlike the public sector, has far fewer avenues for redress of wrongs. try restoring a terminated reddit, fakebook, twitter or YouTube account. The public sector at least has some accountability, which you do not see in the private sector. Civil lawsuits are very expensive, arbitration is not that effective, etc.

inglor_cz 6y ago
It took our ancestors a lot of time and effort to build redress avenues into governments. I think we have to do the same with Big Tech. And the Divine Right of Kings absolutist party has made a comeback in the "they are private companies, why dont you start your own Google" crowd.

hhas01 6y ago

Rogan is a shameless grifter. JRE #1555 was with Alex Jones, a man who shits on murdered kids for money. So what does this have to do with tech, other than its abuse? Frontpage material, my ass.

hhas01 6y ago
Dear downvoters: I have points to spare. What you don’t have is an argument.
- hhas01 6y ago
  Or, clearly, any appreciation of irony.

hluska 6y ago

This isn’t entirely on topic with this thread, but I’ve been shocked by HN’s base reaction to this article. Calling reasonable edits censorship is akin to calling a code review censorship, yet who among us doesn’t participate in code reviews??? Greenwald was not censored, rather he refused to be edited. That’s not journalism, that’s a personality cult. “Journalism” only works when journalists and editors work together - journalists go off, get excited and follow a story; editors keep them connected to publishable truth and article sized bits of context. Speaking as a former publisher who has edited my share of complex pieces, Greenwald’s original article was poor. He had, I believe 2k words to tell a story, but he chose the wrong 2k words.

testrun 6y ago
Wrong according to whom?
neilsense 6y ago
Not sure how your team is doing code-reviews, but they shouldn't be changing the message of the PR, rather just help clean it up.
- tmotwu 6y ago
  It's misleading to say the editor was asking to change the message. The opposite: it's clear to me Greenwald did not clearly communicate the intended narrative of his piece, so the editors thought the article lacked focus. It's like telling Greenwald, hey you added functionality that was not originally part of the design doc. That's fine and all but now test coverage is diminished. Heres a few tests to consider so you could strengthen the robustness of the code. To say editors were overstepping their bounds is silly. Greenwald went on a morning show yesterday morning. He admits his journalistic philosophy is unconventional; he started off as a blog and was recruited into media. That's fine. I build a few side projects in my free time and I love it because there's so much freedom on how to structure your code. Greenwald feels the same way about writing his pieces, so he will feel right at home in the blogger universe.
  - 6y ago

evgen 6y ago

Two frauds, one show.

hintymad 6y ago

Wow! I can understand that people downvote this post. But flagging it? It really shows who you are. Anything that challenges your narrative must be gone. Now I get it.

LockAndLol 6y ago
Is there a way to unflag it like "counter flag" or something? Is Glen Greenwald really that controversial on HackerNews? I thought that this crowd would be most receptive to him after he helped Snowden expose the egregious misconduct of the U.S government. What is going on with this community?
- hintymad 6y ago
  The left (not the liberal, mind you) has moralized everything. So, they naturally want to censor aany opinion that does not agree with their view. It is, after all, for our own good, and it is only the left who can define what good means.
apta 6y ago
That's the far left for you. They claim to be the manifestation of anti-facism, yet we see the full ostracizing and "cancelling" of anyone who dares hold a different opinion.