3 ms·

Why does it post the Intercept in a bad light?

ekjhgkejhgk 5d ago
The Intercept was created for the purpose of publishing the Snowden archive. After a few articles, they decided they weren't going to do it any more, for reasons which are never entirely clear (Greenwald gave different justifications each time). And Greenwald was very aware of this: > On 12 March Poitras was told on a telephone call with Greenwald and Wilson that Greenwald and Reed had decided to shut the archive, because it was no longer of value to The Intercept. On the same call, according to her account, Greenwald said the decision should not be made public because it would look bad for him and for The Intercept. Two days earlier the problem had been money, but now it was "value". Speculation: the Intercept was a move by the NSA to shut down the last copy that hadn't already complied. Get a friendly billionaire acting as a concerned citizen, shower the key individuals with money, and once they're hooked make it clear that if the publication continue the money stops. > In October 2013, tech billionaire Pierre Omidyar founded First Look Media (FLM), a New York nonprofit, as a collaboration with Greenwald, Poitras and Jeremy Scahill, with a promised $250 million in funding. FLM's first publication, The Intercept, launched on 10 February 2014 with purpose to report the Snowden documents. ( ... ) > The Intercept paid its senior journalists well. FLM reported $1.6 million to Glenn Greenwald's company between 2014 and 2017; $349,826 in total compensation to Jeremy Scahill in 2015; $368,249 to Betsy Reed in 2017. Charles R. Davis, writing in the Columbia Journalism Review, noted that such figures "are large for digital media and noteworthy in the world of progressive, nonprofit journalism."
- hnhg 5d ago
  I've known people involved in the creation of the Intercept. It wasn't funded with the purpose to report the Snowden documents, but rather that came along as an opportunity that they thought would create a big splash for the launch of a new news platform that would shake up the industry. The billionaire involved didn't anticipate the fury from the authorities (i.e. receiving personal, serious phone calls from various govt. figures and agencies) and they quickly came to regret everything and adjusted course. I know this is a "trust me bro" comment but it's worth sharing.
  - jasonvorhe 5d ago
    I'm not surprised that this billionaire was actually surprised by this.
  - jules-jules 5d ago
    Makes sense. OP is leaning I to conspiracional adhoc reasoning. I’m sure Pierre would rather keep his Hawaiian island than to field questions from the agencies
  - Arodex 5d ago
    >The billionaire involved didn't anticipate the fury from the authorities Proving again that the billionaire class is more lucky than smart, and has now more money than sense.
    - linkregister 5d ago
      I'm confident there's significant variation within the cohort.
- throwaway85825 5d ago
  Greenwald was probably blackmailed with something worse than the foot video he posted.
  - TiredOfLife 5d ago
    Is that's why he constantly reposts russian propaganda and conspiracy theories?
    - 2301976 5d ago
      I think we have to distinguish between people who outright post Russian propaganda like Scott Ritter and people like Greenwald and Mearsheimer who say the Ukraine war is a US proxy war and was provoked. The latter applied to many US (and historically British empire wars, from where the US learned). Greenwald had a Rumble contract for daily videos during the Biden years, so I think it would be fair to say he was a Trump influencer. He also has many enemies in Brazil (e.g.. Supreme Judge Moraes), so that video could have come from anywhere. But yes, he could also have been threatened over the Snowden files earlier.
      - ekjhgkejhgk 5d ago
        Suppose that I grant you that the Ukraine war was "provoked by the US" - which I most certainly don't. But suppose. It might still be the case that something is true AND propaganda. Good propaganda has a grain of truth. The key for identifying propaganda isn't "is a statement false?" but "is one of the sides pushing the statement, because it's benefitial for them". In this sense, "the Ukraine war was provoked by the US" would be propaganda even if it were true - which it's not. That said, I think you have to be proficient at mental gymnastics to believe that the aggressor is actually the victim.
        123886 5d ago
        > That said, I think you have to be proficient at mental gymnastics to believe that the aggressor is actually the victim. That is a fine example of propaganda: All people, including historians who evaluate different possibilities, surely want to paint Russia as the victim! You are literally forbidding people to think.
- 2301976 5d ago
  The Intercept later also leaked Reality Winner's identity, so that sounds plausible.
  - linkregister 5d ago
    Not through malice, but through negligence.
    - signalblur 5d ago
      They also published a federal whistleblowers medical history showing, and when called out on it said it was sourced from the IC. The intercept is a joke and so are those that work there.
  - frmersdog 5d ago
    On a tangential note, watching the documentary on her was the first time I viscerally understood that people with very different ideas about how to live can agree on some fundamental political principles, and don't have to stuff themselves into right/left boxes for easy manipulation. They went after her hard because a culturally-conservative, intelligent, hard-nosed soldier type who sticks to virtues that are not completely in-line with our warhawk doctrine is their worst nightmare. EDIT: https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/reality_winner https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/reality_winner

The Intercept was created for the purpose of publishing the Snowden archive. After a few articles, they decided they weren't going to do it any more, for reasons which are never entirely clear (Greenwald gave different justifications each time). And Greenwald was very aware of this: > On 12 March Poitras was told on a telephone call with Greenwald and Wilson that Greenwald and Reed had decided to shut the archive, because it was no longer of value to The Intercept. On the same call, according to her account, Greenwald said the decision should not be made public because it would look bad for him and for The Intercept. Two days earlier the problem had been money, but now it was "value". Speculation: the Intercept was a move by the NSA to shut down the last copy that hadn't already complied. Get a friendly billionaire acting as a concerned citizen, shower the key individuals with money, and once they're hooked make it clear that if the publication continue the money stops. > In October 2013, tech billionaire Pierre Omidyar founded First Look Media (FLM), a New York nonprofit, as a collaboration with Greenwald, Poitras and Jeremy Scahill, with a promised $250 million in funding. FLM's first publication, The Intercept, launched on 10 February 2014 with purpose to report the Snowden documents. ( ... ) > The Intercept paid its senior journalists well. FLM reported $1.6 million to Glenn Greenwald's company between 2014 and 2017; $349,826 in total compensation to Jeremy Scahill in 2015; $368,249 to Betsy Reed in 2017. Charles R. Davis, writing in the Columbia Journalism Review, noted that such figures "are large for digital media and noteworthy in the world of progressive, nonprofit journalism."

hnhg 5d ago
I've known people involved in the creation of the Intercept. It wasn't funded with the purpose to report the Snowden documents, but rather that came along as an opportunity that they thought would create a big splash for the launch of a new news platform that would shake up the industry. The billionaire involved didn't anticipate the fury from the authorities (i.e. receiving personal, serious phone calls from various govt. figures and agencies) and they quickly came to regret everything and adjusted course. I know this is a "trust me bro" comment but it's worth sharing.
- jasonvorhe 5d ago
  I'm not surprised that this billionaire was actually surprised by this.
- jules-jules 5d ago
  Makes sense. OP is leaning I to conspiracional adhoc reasoning. I’m sure Pierre would rather keep his Hawaiian island than to field questions from the agencies
- Arodex 5d ago
  >The billionaire involved didn't anticipate the fury from the authorities Proving again that the billionaire class is more lucky than smart, and has now more money than sense.
  - linkregister 5d ago
    I'm confident there's significant variation within the cohort.
throwaway85825 5d ago
Greenwald was probably blackmailed with something worse than the foot video he posted.
- TiredOfLife 5d ago
  Is that's why he constantly reposts russian propaganda and conspiracy theories?
  - 2301976 5d ago
    I think we have to distinguish between people who outright post Russian propaganda like Scott Ritter and people like Greenwald and Mearsheimer who say the Ukraine war is a US proxy war and was provoked. The latter applied to many US (and historically British empire wars, from where the US learned). Greenwald had a Rumble contract for daily videos during the Biden years, so I think it would be fair to say he was a Trump influencer. He also has many enemies in Brazil (e.g.. Supreme Judge Moraes), so that video could have come from anywhere. But yes, he could also have been threatened over the Snowden files earlier.
    - ekjhgkejhgk 5d ago
      Suppose that I grant you that the Ukraine war was "provoked by the US" - which I most certainly don't. But suppose. It might still be the case that something is true AND propaganda. Good propaganda has a grain of truth. The key for identifying propaganda isn't "is a statement false?" but "is one of the sides pushing the statement, because it's benefitial for them". In this sense, "the Ukraine war was provoked by the US" would be propaganda even if it were true - which it's not. That said, I think you have to be proficient at mental gymnastics to believe that the aggressor is actually the victim.
      - 123886 5d ago
        > That said, I think you have to be proficient at mental gymnastics to believe that the aggressor is actually the victim. That is a fine example of propaganda: All people, including historians who evaluate different possibilities, surely want to paint Russia as the victim! You are literally forbidding people to think.
2301976 5d ago
The Intercept later also leaked Reality Winner's identity, so that sounds plausible.
- linkregister 5d ago
  Not through malice, but through negligence.
  - signalblur 5d ago
    They also published a federal whistleblowers medical history showing, and when called out on it said it was sourced from the IC. The intercept is a joke and so are those that work there.
- frmersdog 5d ago
  On a tangential note, watching the documentary on her was the first time I viscerally understood that people with very different ideas about how to live can agree on some fundamental political principles, and don't have to stuff themselves into right/left boxes for easy manipulation. They went after her hard because a culturally-conservative, intelligent, hard-nosed soldier type who sticks to virtues that are not completely in-line with our warhawk doctrine is their worst nightmare. EDIT: https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/reality_winner https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/reality_winner