6 ms·

Say what you will about CNN, MSNBC, and even Fox: their news departments meet editorial standards that Greenwald can’t handle. He chose to ragequit and declared

by drewrv 6y ago

Say what you will about CNN, MSNBC, and even Fox: their news departments meet editorial standards that Greenwald can’t handle. He chose to ragequit and declared “censorship” instead.

lawnchair_larry 6y ago
He didn’t work for any of those outlets. He quit the company he founded, the intercept, who was indeed censoring.
- CaptainZapp 6y ago
  > He quit the company he founded, the intercept, who was indeed censoring. That is, at the very least, debatable Greenwald had the liberty at The Intercept to publish his opinion pieces without any editorial interference. The piece he yelled BLOODY MURDER! about and resigned in a hissy fit was decidedly not an opinion piece, but sourced from The New York Post - The Biden laptop story -, which was so bad, that the original writers at the Post refused to have their bylines printed. When The Intercept insisted that this apparently factual piece gets editorial treatment (a process applied by every halfway serious press product) he yelled CENSORSHIP! and resigned. No question that Greenwald did good work in the past. But I, for one, can't take his hysterics, which he now spouts for years, serious any more.
  - juanani 6y ago
    I think everyone turned on him because he spoke the nastiest of truths at the most inconvenient time (week before elections). And lo and behold our political apparatus swiped their power back, and did not allow anyone to question anything. Even a top journalist with years of good work can be smeared in front of the public unquestioningly. And that doesn't mean squat since orange man baaad - exactly what the media ingrained in the masses(yes you included) for the past four years. Nation of free thinkers can't focus for shit.
  - finnthehuman 6y ago
    >decidedly not an opinion piece, but sourced from The New York Post Sorry if I'm misreading you, but are you suggesting that an opinion piece ceases to be an opinion piece if it references and includes details from news reporting?
- drewrv 6y ago
  I know he didn’t work there, you’re missing my point: editorial control is not censorship. It’s not censorship when my PR fails code review, it means it needs more work. Similarly for journalists, editors exist to hold them to high standards and if those standards aren’t met it’s not censorship, it’s just part of the job. All newsrooms have safeguards in place to ensure what they publish is credible, and policies for handling mistakes and corrections when stuff slips through the cracks. The fact that Greenwald threw a tantrum when held to standards that most working journalists are (and should be) held to does not make him a brave truth teller. It means his credibility is suspect. Pretending for a moment that there was a terrible editor who was conspiring to squash a well-sourced story, a competent and ethical journalist could simply bring the story elsewhere to get published or pass along their findings to another journalist at a different publication. What a charlatan and a hack would do is raise a big stink, cry wolf, and direct their audience to a substack where people can pay money to hear more, free from any pesky fact checkers.
  - YaSamPoSebe 6y ago
    I think you have no idea what you are talking about.
nightowl_games 6y ago
I strongly disagree. Where were these standards during the Covington Highschool kid case? Where were journalistic standards when Governor Cuomo was covering up care home deaths? Where was journalistic standards when the CEO of Sinohawk Holdings was implicating Joe Biden in corruption? CNN's coverage of Bernie Sanders has been plainly obviously biased against him [1]. CNN is not journalism. CNN is a TV show designed to enthrall and manipulate. Glenn Greenwald has countless times illuminated the deception of the Intelligence Community and how they peddle influence through CNN. I don't understand how you do not see this. I think you are choosing to see a particular world view because you are perhaps uncomfortable with how chaoticly complicated the world is. The people that I look to for the truth in complicated times are: Glenn Greenwald, Matt Taibi, Chris Hedges and Sam Harris. I recommend these people to everyone. [1] https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/09/world/meanwhile-in-america-april-9/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/09/world/meanwhile-in-america-ap... Specifically "Welfare" & "Socialism"
- drewrv 6y ago
  I don’t think CNN is the pinnacle of journalism, I’m saying they meet a minimum bar of standards that Greenwald doesn’t or can’t. CNN definitely has a bias towards scandal and outrage but so does Greenwald. He has the same incentives as them (clicks) but he does it without fact checkers. What I recommend to people is a diverse media diet. Different mediums, different incentives, etc. So not Fox News and MSNBC, but newspapers, books about current events, public broadcasting, etc. And best to be skeptical of anyone promising “the truth about X” or “what Y doesn’t want you to know”.

by drewrv 6y ago

Say what you will about CNN, MSNBC, and even Fox: their news departments meet editorial standards that Greenwald can’t handle. He chose to ragequit and declared “censorship” instead.

lawnchair_larry 6y ago

He didn’t work for any of those outlets. He quit the company he founded, the intercept, who was indeed censoring.

CaptainZapp 6y ago
> He quit the company he founded, the intercept, who was indeed censoring. That is, at the very least, debatable Greenwald had the liberty at The Intercept to publish his opinion pieces without any editorial interference. The piece he yelled BLOODY MURDER! about and resigned in a hissy fit was decidedly not an opinion piece, but sourced from The New York Post - The Biden laptop story -, which was so bad, that the original writers at the Post refused to have their bylines printed. When The Intercept insisted that this apparently factual piece gets editorial treatment (a process applied by every halfway serious press product) he yelled CENSORSHIP! and resigned. No question that Greenwald did good work in the past. But I, for one, can't take his hysterics, which he now spouts for years, serious any more.
- juanani 6y ago
  I think everyone turned on him because he spoke the nastiest of truths at the most inconvenient time (week before elections). And lo and behold our political apparatus swiped their power back, and did not allow anyone to question anything. Even a top journalist with years of good work can be smeared in front of the public unquestioningly. And that doesn't mean squat since orange man baaad - exactly what the media ingrained in the masses(yes you included) for the past four years. Nation of free thinkers can't focus for shit.
- finnthehuman 6y ago
  >decidedly not an opinion piece, but sourced from The New York Post Sorry if I'm misreading you, but are you suggesting that an opinion piece ceases to be an opinion piece if it references and includes details from news reporting?
drewrv 6y ago
I know he didn’t work there, you’re missing my point: editorial control is not censorship. It’s not censorship when my PR fails code review, it means it needs more work. Similarly for journalists, editors exist to hold them to high standards and if those standards aren’t met it’s not censorship, it’s just part of the job. All newsrooms have safeguards in place to ensure what they publish is credible, and policies for handling mistakes and corrections when stuff slips through the cracks. The fact that Greenwald threw a tantrum when held to standards that most working journalists are (and should be) held to does not make him a brave truth teller. It means his credibility is suspect. Pretending for a moment that there was a terrible editor who was conspiring to squash a well-sourced story, a competent and ethical journalist could simply bring the story elsewhere to get published or pass along their findings to another journalist at a different publication. What a charlatan and a hack would do is raise a big stink, cry wolf, and direct their audience to a substack where people can pay money to hear more, free from any pesky fact checkers.
- YaSamPoSebe 6y ago
  I think you have no idea what you are talking about.

nightowl_games 6y ago

I strongly disagree. Where were these standards during the Covington Highschool kid case? Where were journalistic standards when Governor Cuomo was covering up care home deaths? Where was journalistic standards when the CEO of Sinohawk Holdings was implicating Joe Biden in corruption? CNN's coverage of Bernie Sanders has been plainly obviously biased against him [1]. CNN is not journalism. CNN is a TV show designed to enthrall and manipulate. Glenn Greenwald has countless times illuminated the deception of the Intelligence Community and how they peddle influence through CNN. I don't understand how you do not see this. I think you are choosing to see a particular world view because you are perhaps uncomfortable with how chaoticly complicated the world is. The people that I look to for the truth in complicated times are: Glenn Greenwald, Matt Taibi, Chris Hedges and Sam Harris. I recommend these people to everyone. [1] https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/09/world/meanwhile-in-america-april-9/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/09/world/meanwhile-in-america-ap... Specifically "Welfare" & "Socialism"

drewrv 6y ago
I don’t think CNN is the pinnacle of journalism, I’m saying they meet a minimum bar of standards that Greenwald doesn’t or can’t. CNN definitely has a bias towards scandal and outrage but so does Greenwald. He has the same incentives as them (clicks) but he does it without fact checkers. What I recommend to people is a diverse media diet. Different mediums, different incentives, etc. So not Fox News and MSNBC, but newspapers, books about current events, public broadcasting, etc. And best to be skeptical of anyone promising “the truth about X” or “what Y doesn’t want you to know”.