5 ms·

Genuinely baffled what value anybody sees in this article. Regulation of social media is a serious issue that deserves serious attention. There's a huge amount

Genuinely baffled what value anybody sees in this article. Regulation of social media is a serious issue that deserves serious attention. There's a huge amount of nuance, with lots of deep questions about what publishing and freedom of speech look like in a world where everybody has access to an algorithmically-controlled global platform. In contrast to that, Greenwald just presents an absolute mash of ridiculous clickbait, dogwhistle phrases, and vague insinuations. It contributes precisely nothing to answering any of those questions.

kristopolous 6y ago
It's a shame how much Assange and Greenwald have fallen.
- cutler 6y ago
  Care to elaborate?
  - DJBunnies 6y ago
    Don't feed the trolls.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - kristopolous 6y ago
      I'm not trolling, see my response to the op. I thought the stuff I put in there was common knowledge. Sorry if it wasn't
  - kristopolous 6y ago
    Assange was pedaling weird assertions in the far right Seth Rich conspiracies making completely baseless claims that have since proven absolutely false, it was him just fabricating stuff. It harmed both the Rich family and fueled the online conspiracy machines. He's followed it up with satanist cabal and earpiece nonsense. He's done rhetorical acrobatics to stand his ground instead of owning his own bs. Go to the "conspiracies" section on their wikipedia page https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/WikiLeaks https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/WikiLeaks That happened right before the 2016 election. Greenwald has gone from groundbreaking reporting to political theater and shock jock punditry, palling around with bullshit merchants like Tucker Carlson. He quit the intercept which refused to publish him making clearly incorrect claims about major candidates shortly before the 2020 election https://theintercept.com/2020/10/29/glenn-greenwald-resigns-the-intercept/ https://theintercept.com/2020/10/29/glenn-greenwald-resigns-... . Essentially a repeat of 2016 was primed but the rest of the intercept told him to screw off. They've both gone from the gold standard to completely unreliable political ops. It's almost like the con artists in the red pilling bullshit machines targeted both of them, it's pretty bad.
- snicksnak 6y ago
  Assange is in prison, possibly for life for the crime of making US war crimes public. Greenwald has 24/7 protection because his recent reporting exposed the corruption in Balsonaro's administration and lead to Lula being freed from prison. All the journalists who advocate censorship of things they don't like and engage in smear campaigns have never broken or reported on anything meaningful and probably never will. Many of them probably think that Assange deserves to be extradited and charged, even though that is a direct attack on their profession.
  - kristopolous 6y ago
    Assange more recently "reported" wild far right conspiracy theories about Seth Rich, satanic cabals, secret ear pieces and other things of that nature. Greenwald More Recently has been on shows of hard right people like Tucker Carlson and quit The Intercept because they refused to publish conspiracy theories about Joe Biden right before the 2020 election. Here's the actual hit piece the intercept wouldn't publish https://greenwald.substack.com/p/article-on-joe-and-hunter-biden-censored https://greenwald.substack.com/p/article-on-joe-and-hunter-b... it was an attempted October surprise the paper wouldn't sign on to Here he basically says January 6 was a bunch of peaceful protestors misrepresented as violent, really https://greenwald.substack.com/p/the-false-and-exaggerated-claims https://greenwald.substack.com/p/the-false-and-exaggerated-c... And here he is suggesting vote counting misconducts https://greenwald.substack.com/p/the-us-inability-to-count-votes-is https://greenwald.substack.com/p/the-us-inability-to-count-v... And here he says you know who the "actual fascist" are? Facebook and Joe Biden https://greenwald.substack.com/p/the-threat-of-authoritarianism-in https://greenwald.substack.com/p/the-threat-of-authoritarian... Splendid, just great, sounds like my uncle. Dude's totally pilled. The takeaway is effectively "don't trust the mainstream media, Trump is amazing" every time. The conspiracy land world has a main door via Trump. But there's side doors that can hook people in as well. Through leftism (via strasserism the first time it came around), natural medicine, holistic spirituality, gamer culture, theres a bunch of fascist pipelines out there to hook people. Look into their Recent records. They shouldn't be facing state repression of course and should be free to do this. But it's also just political hackery
    - 6y ago
roenxi 6y ago
> and vague insinuations He isn't being vague, he is directly accusing the US Congress of authoritarianism. Then later despotism. He names names. He includes video excerpts. He questions if political censorship is maybe not a good idea and makes it clear he is accusing Congress of exactly that. You can disagree, but he is specific.
- jonahbenton 6y ago
  Most of his specific insinuations/inferences are simply wrong. Parler was not removed because some MoC said for it to be removed. It was removed because it was hosting calls for violence. Greenwald is a crank, looking for attention. He's not worth it.
  - nonford150 6y ago
    And Twitter, FB, etc. was hosting the same sort of messages. We all know why Parker was removed; it’s right-leaning users (i.e. the great unwashed) are deemed unworthy of being part of the conversation. It’s not surprising Jan 6 happened; the parallels to the French Revolution are uncanny.
    - jonahbenton 6y ago
      This is fool talk. Jan 6 and the entire MAGA movement to a first approximation is a grift. It is precisely the opposite of the French Rev. It is the selling of cake in the form of hats and delusion. FB was allowing this messaging. Twitter not so much, T was much more aggressive at moderation. Removing FB is a completely different issue for an app store than Parler, for obvious reasons. Parler also of course was funded by sources that were in US terms problematic. Apple is going after FB in more structural ways. Google tried, but failed. FB is an issue for DoJ now.
equality_1138 6y ago
I think he successfully highlighted a certain lack of competent leadership, which therefore makes is difficult to do the deep regulatory Q&A you had hoped for.

kristopolous 6y ago

It's a shame how much Assange and Greenwald have fallen.

cutler 6y ago
Care to elaborate?
- DJBunnies 6y ago
  Don't feed the trolls.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - kristopolous 6y ago
    I'm not trolling, see my response to the op. I thought the stuff I put in there was common knowledge. Sorry if it wasn't
- kristopolous 6y ago
  Assange was pedaling weird assertions in the far right Seth Rich conspiracies making completely baseless claims that have since proven absolutely false, it was him just fabricating stuff. It harmed both the Rich family and fueled the online conspiracy machines. He's followed it up with satanist cabal and earpiece nonsense. He's done rhetorical acrobatics to stand his ground instead of owning his own bs. Go to the "conspiracies" section on their wikipedia page https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/WikiLeaks https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/WikiLeaks That happened right before the 2016 election. Greenwald has gone from groundbreaking reporting to political theater and shock jock punditry, palling around with bullshit merchants like Tucker Carlson. He quit the intercept which refused to publish him making clearly incorrect claims about major candidates shortly before the 2020 election https://theintercept.com/2020/10/29/glenn-greenwald-resigns-the-intercept/ https://theintercept.com/2020/10/29/glenn-greenwald-resigns-... . Essentially a repeat of 2016 was primed but the rest of the intercept told him to screw off. They've both gone from the gold standard to completely unreliable political ops. It's almost like the con artists in the red pilling bullshit machines targeted both of them, it's pretty bad.
snicksnak 6y ago
Assange is in prison, possibly for life for the crime of making US war crimes public. Greenwald has 24/7 protection because his recent reporting exposed the corruption in Balsonaro's administration and lead to Lula being freed from prison. All the journalists who advocate censorship of things they don't like and engage in smear campaigns have never broken or reported on anything meaningful and probably never will. Many of them probably think that Assange deserves to be extradited and charged, even though that is a direct attack on their profession.
- kristopolous 6y ago
  Assange more recently "reported" wild far right conspiracy theories about Seth Rich, satanic cabals, secret ear pieces and other things of that nature. Greenwald More Recently has been on shows of hard right people like Tucker Carlson and quit The Intercept because they refused to publish conspiracy theories about Joe Biden right before the 2020 election. Here's the actual hit piece the intercept wouldn't publish https://greenwald.substack.com/p/article-on-joe-and-hunter-biden-censored https://greenwald.substack.com/p/article-on-joe-and-hunter-b... it was an attempted October surprise the paper wouldn't sign on to Here he basically says January 6 was a bunch of peaceful protestors misrepresented as violent, really https://greenwald.substack.com/p/the-false-and-exaggerated-claims https://greenwald.substack.com/p/the-false-and-exaggerated-c... And here he is suggesting vote counting misconducts https://greenwald.substack.com/p/the-us-inability-to-count-votes-is https://greenwald.substack.com/p/the-us-inability-to-count-v... And here he says you know who the "actual fascist" are? Facebook and Joe Biden https://greenwald.substack.com/p/the-threat-of-authoritarianism-in https://greenwald.substack.com/p/the-threat-of-authoritarian... Splendid, just great, sounds like my uncle. Dude's totally pilled. The takeaway is effectively "don't trust the mainstream media, Trump is amazing" every time. The conspiracy land world has a main door via Trump. But there's side doors that can hook people in as well. Through leftism (via strasserism the first time it came around), natural medicine, holistic spirituality, gamer culture, theres a bunch of fascist pipelines out there to hook people. Look into their Recent records. They shouldn't be facing state repression of course and should be free to do this. But it's also just political hackery
  - 6y ago

roenxi 6y ago

> and vague insinuations He isn't being vague, he is directly accusing the US Congress of authoritarianism. Then later despotism. He names names. He includes video excerpts. He questions if political censorship is maybe not a good idea and makes it clear he is accusing Congress of exactly that. You can disagree, but he is specific.

jonahbenton 6y ago
Most of his specific insinuations/inferences are simply wrong. Parler was not removed because some MoC said for it to be removed. It was removed because it was hosting calls for violence. Greenwald is a crank, looking for attention. He's not worth it.
- nonford150 6y ago
  And Twitter, FB, etc. was hosting the same sort of messages. We all know why Parker was removed; it’s right-leaning users (i.e. the great unwashed) are deemed unworthy of being part of the conversation. It’s not surprising Jan 6 happened; the parallels to the French Revolution are uncanny.
  - jonahbenton 6y ago
    This is fool talk. Jan 6 and the entire MAGA movement to a first approximation is a grift. It is precisely the opposite of the French Rev. It is the selling of cake in the form of hats and delusion. FB was allowing this messaging. Twitter not so much, T was much more aggressive at moderation. Removing FB is a completely different issue for an app store than Parler, for obvious reasons. Parler also of course was funded by sources that were in US terms problematic. Apple is going after FB in more structural ways. Google tried, but failed. FB is an issue for DoJ now.

equality_1138 6y ago

I think he successfully highlighted a certain lack of competent leadership, which therefore makes is difficult to do the deep regulatory Q&A you had hoped for.