4 ms·

Cross "The Intercept" off the list of organizations I donate to.

by smoyer 6y ago

ProAm 6y ago
100% completely. This is disgraceful.
api 6y ago
It took this? Greenwald has been a crackpot and possibly a closet fascist for years. The only reason anyone ever took him or the Intercept seriously is that Snowden dropped a huge story right in his lap. All he had to do was to be mildly competent at handling that and he was assured a reputation.
- Terretta 6y ago
  Early Greenwald was interesting. Recent Greenwald seems off the deep end, such as his flat assertion that nobody organized anything about 6 Jan on Parler, only on Facebook. He used to uncover inconvenient facts, facts that challenged both sides’ tight narratives. Now he seems to cherry pick or manufacture fact-ish soundbites to push a contrarian or click-bait position. There’s not a lot of daylight between these, but I suspect the difference has to do with the tedious work needed for being a great reporter. Early Greenwald method seemed to be “do the homework”, recent Greenwald method seems more akin to Fox’s opinion hosts the Fox legal team disclaims as nobody reasonably believing are real news.
  - boomboomsubban 6y ago
    >his flat assertion that nobody organized anything about 6 Jan on Parler, only on Facebook. His accusation was that none of the thirteen people arrested actively used Parler, something he "did the homework" on by checking with Parler executives. Virtually all the criticism I see of Greenwald seems based on false strawman versions of his arguments ignoring what he is actually writing about.
  - ncmncm 6y ago
    Greenwald's behavior in recent years is, for all the world, like someone whose access to information is being ever-so-carefully managed so as to subconsciously lead him down a path to discredit himself and drive away his support group. If that is what is happening, it is terrifying that it has been achieved. Such a capability might have been a goal of the original MK-ULTRA project. Its original purpose was, by the evidence, to test, on the US public, methods of thought control. An early project, to get people to believe the CIA were trying to use ESP for spying, was a rousing success: to this day, a strong majority of Americans still believe it. For another application of their methods, consider the ground-swell of support for invading Iraq, despite every scrap of actual evidence showing that its casus belli was completely fallacious. QAnon might be one of their projects; it's weird enough, but just as likely someone else's. The whole recent Navy/UFOs business has all of their fingerprints. Jon Ronson's book, "Men Who Stare at Goats" is a terrifying exploration of the development of the US pychological warfare apparatus and its experimentation on the American public. Equally as terrifying is the prospect of veterans of the program going into business for themselves.
  - washadjeffmad 6y ago
    In the spirit of not doing homeworking, you raise an unintended point on the value of our words. Whether or not anyone agrees with you, you don't have a reputation, you haven't done meaningful research, and the accusations you've asserted under the flimsy guise of opinion are the kind of unsubstantiated and valueless commentary you'd expect from one of the less brazen corporate media outlets. You've provided no defense of the basis of your intuition other than sprinkling a few "seems" around. Seems to whom, on what evidence? That's the difference between someone who has cultivated a history of performing reputable journalism, defended under the scrutiny of editors, fact finders, and the public and low effort armchair experts, spin doctors, popular conspiracy theorists, and other soundbite spewing talking heads. I'm not exempt, but my point is that when subjected to the same standards and scrutiny we might hold another to, especially on the internet, we don't often fare as well as we'd think.
- smoyer 6y ago
  I agree completely ... it's more like this was the final straw as my support was in part a "thank you" to Laura Poitras. I have to admit that I've gotten tired of ALL news sites as there are way too many pop-ups, ads, auto-playing audio/video, etc. Lately I've been getting news almost exclusively from https://lite.cnn.com https://lite.cnn.com - it has both the nostagia of the early web and the text-only nature of the CLI so it may be the perfect news outlet for me as a nerd.

Cross "The Intercept" off the list of organizations I donate to.

by smoyer 6y ago

Cross "The Intercept" off the list of organizations I donate to.

ProAm 6y ago

100% completely. This is disgraceful.

api 6y ago

It took this? Greenwald has been a crackpot and possibly a closet fascist for years. The only reason anyone ever took him or the Intercept seriously is that Snowden dropped a huge story right in his lap. All he had to do was to be mildly competent at handling that and he was assured a reputation.

Terretta 6y ago
Early Greenwald was interesting. Recent Greenwald seems off the deep end, such as his flat assertion that nobody organized anything about 6 Jan on Parler, only on Facebook. He used to uncover inconvenient facts, facts that challenged both sides’ tight narratives. Now he seems to cherry pick or manufacture fact-ish soundbites to push a contrarian or click-bait position. There’s not a lot of daylight between these, but I suspect the difference has to do with the tedious work needed for being a great reporter. Early Greenwald method seemed to be “do the homework”, recent Greenwald method seems more akin to Fox’s opinion hosts the Fox legal team disclaims as nobody reasonably believing are real news.
- boomboomsubban 6y ago
  >his flat assertion that nobody organized anything about 6 Jan on Parler, only on Facebook. His accusation was that none of the thirteen people arrested actively used Parler, something he "did the homework" on by checking with Parler executives. Virtually all the criticism I see of Greenwald seems based on false strawman versions of his arguments ignoring what he is actually writing about.
- ncmncm 6y ago
  Greenwald's behavior in recent years is, for all the world, like someone whose access to information is being ever-so-carefully managed so as to subconsciously lead him down a path to discredit himself and drive away his support group. If that is what is happening, it is terrifying that it has been achieved. Such a capability might have been a goal of the original MK-ULTRA project. Its original purpose was, by the evidence, to test, on the US public, methods of thought control. An early project, to get people to believe the CIA were trying to use ESP for spying, was a rousing success: to this day, a strong majority of Americans still believe it. For another application of their methods, consider the ground-swell of support for invading Iraq, despite every scrap of actual evidence showing that its casus belli was completely fallacious. QAnon might be one of their projects; it's weird enough, but just as likely someone else's. The whole recent Navy/UFOs business has all of their fingerprints. Jon Ronson's book, "Men Who Stare at Goats" is a terrifying exploration of the development of the US pychological warfare apparatus and its experimentation on the American public. Equally as terrifying is the prospect of veterans of the program going into business for themselves.
- washadjeffmad 6y ago
  In the spirit of not doing homeworking, you raise an unintended point on the value of our words. Whether or not anyone agrees with you, you don't have a reputation, you haven't done meaningful research, and the accusations you've asserted under the flimsy guise of opinion are the kind of unsubstantiated and valueless commentary you'd expect from one of the less brazen corporate media outlets. You've provided no defense of the basis of your intuition other than sprinkling a few "seems" around. Seems to whom, on what evidence? That's the difference between someone who has cultivated a history of performing reputable journalism, defended under the scrutiny of editors, fact finders, and the public and low effort armchair experts, spin doctors, popular conspiracy theorists, and other soundbite spewing talking heads. I'm not exempt, but my point is that when subjected to the same standards and scrutiny we might hold another to, especially on the internet, we don't often fare as well as we'd think.
smoyer 6y ago
I agree completely ... it's more like this was the final straw as my support was in part a "thank you" to Laura Poitras. I have to admit that I've gotten tired of ALL news sites as there are way too many pop-ups, ads, auto-playing audio/video, etc. Lately I've been getting news almost exclusively from https://lite.cnn.com https://lite.cnn.com - it has both the nostagia of the early web and the text-only nature of the CLI so it may be the perfect news outlet for me as a nerd.