3 ms·

The WaPo review is even weirder. The author can't even maintain the pretense that he's commenting on Greenwald instead of just defending his own home turf. An

The WaPo review is even weirder. The author can't even maintain the pretense that he's commenting on Greenwald instead of just defending his own home turf. Anyone reporting in DC for a media outlet with any access to politicians, knows they their reporting is tempered by their desired to maintain that access to power. The fact he doesn't acknowledge that says pretty much everything you need to know about the quality of the review. Edit: Turns out Cole is a law professor: I guess that explains his deference to the current law and attitude that what we already know the NSA is unable to be scandalous in and of itself. Even when Cole attempts to elucidate a criticism of Greenwald I already agree with, he looks like a hack. Once the Casablana quote comes up it's obvious this guy is just sputtering trying to find a way to look down his nose at the guy that won his paper a Pulitzer. http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/no-place-to-hide-by-glenn-greenwald-on-the-nsas-sweeping-efforts-to-know-it-all/2014/05/12/dfa45dee-d628-11e3-8a78-8fe50322a72c_story.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/no-place-to-hide-by-g...

mturmon 12y ago
I don't think you're familiar with David Cole. He's not some drone reporter, trying not to offend his government contacts. His main job is as a law professor, not a reporter. He's the legal affairs correspondent for The Nation, which is probably the premier left-oriented intellectual journal in the US. This journal was against the Iraq war from Day One, for example, and has never had any problem with its outsider status. Cole's most recent article in the NY Review is titled "We Kill People Based on Metadata" (http://www.nybooks.com/blogs/nyrblog/2014/may/10/we-kill-people-based-metadata/ http://www.nybooks.com/blogs/nyrblog/2014/may/10/we-kill-peo...). There is more on his track record here: http://www.law.georgetown.edu/faculty/cole-david-d.cfm# http://www.law.georgetown.edu/faculty/cole-david-d.cfm# I think, as a litigator and law professor, he's invested in the idea that both competing interests be recognized. But confusing that with hackery is a mistake. As is the notion that Cole feels a need to defend the WaPo -- he's not part of the WaPo. * Regarding the remarks nearby on the limitations of the NYT -- yes, the main problem with the NYT is that it is an establishment paper. Not always "liberal", but typically reliably "establishment". This partly explains their behavior WRT the Iraq war. And maybe also their assigning Michiko Kakutani, their all-purpose book reviewer (typically of literary fare, but not always), to such a political book. I think they would have been better served with a specialist.

mturmon 12y ago

I don't think you're familiar with David Cole. He's not some drone reporter, trying not to offend his government contacts. His main job is as a law professor, not a reporter. He's the legal affairs correspondent for The Nation, which is probably the premier left-oriented intellectual journal in the US. This journal was against the Iraq war from Day One, for example, and has never had any problem with its outsider status. Cole's most recent article in the NY Review is titled "We Kill People Based on Metadata" (http://www.nybooks.com/blogs/nyrblog/2014/may/10/we-kill-people-based-metadata/ http://www.nybooks.com/blogs/nyrblog/2014/may/10/we-kill-peo...). There is more on his track record here: http://www.law.georgetown.edu/faculty/cole-david-d.cfm# http://www.law.georgetown.edu/faculty/cole-david-d.cfm# I think, as a litigator and law professor, he's invested in the idea that both competing interests be recognized. But confusing that with hackery is a mistake. As is the notion that Cole feels a need to defend the WaPo -- he's not part of the WaPo. * Regarding the remarks nearby on the limitations of the NYT -- yes, the main problem with the NYT is that it is an establishment paper. Not always "liberal", but typically reliably "establishment". This partly explains their behavior WRT the Iraq war. And maybe also their assigning Michiko Kakutani, their all-purpose book reviewer (typically of literary fare, but not always), to such a political book. I think they would have been better served with a specialist.