ANOTHER ONE?
I didn't read into all this closely but regardless of the quality of the editing, wasn't one of Glenn's main points that contractually they can't force edits on him
can someone give me the tldr for this whole thing. I understand he stepped down etc
Glenn Greenwald, the messiest drama hound in all of online politics, has, inexplicably, started a whole mess of drama.
Glenn is the only person who can do the whole "I will never log off" bit completely sincerely.
Not sure what level of brainworms he's on, but it's a doozy.
Someone made a good point that him going independent means he no longer has a major publications legal team on his side. Which makes it harder and more dangerous for him to do investigative pieces on people like Bolsonaro. He definitely should've just tried to have a blog for some of his opinions and maintained a relationship with the intercept.
Tbf he did say the intercept forbid him from publishing the biden stuff on other news platforms or even independently
Glenn wanted to write an editorial about the Hunter Biden situation (basically uncritically repeating every right-wing talking point), with no new reporting or information. The editors said "no", and Glenn pitched a fit and resigned.
Journos are saying he was told to find a second source to back up the allegations, and he refused or couldn't, but that's just my reading of what journos are saying.
Between the lines, I think it's pretty clear Glenn was approaching or passed the point of being a benefit to the Intercept, and more of an albatross around their neck.
This seems more like Greenwalds contrarian brainstorms, but u/Charlesmarks is right that Naomi Klein is suspect these days. Sad to see someone like her go down that route
I don't know enough about her to say what's going on with her, I'm afraid. Too many microcelebs on the left to follow 🔬
But if she's in on some Silicon Valley green tech BS, that's not a great sign. Still, she's right about Glenn in this case.
He doesn't repeat it uncritically at all imo, and everyone here should read his article. https://greenwald.substack.com/p/emails-with-intercept-editors-showing
You say right wing talking points, but surely there is a leftist take on the Hunter Biden corruption?
That it's standard failchild bullshit for the elites? That's not what Glenn was writing about. Here's the editorial he quit over. It's entirely focused on other media outlets, no leftist analysis whatsoever. Glenn isn't a leftist, he's a free speech guy, and all free speech warriors seem to wind up in the same gutter.
i'd just like to know why greenwald thinks the media is covering for biden. surely it's in the media's material interest to have trump reelected. trump singlehandedly saved the nytimes and wapo from ruin. what would the media possibly have to gain by not publishing a scandal, ever, especially if it got trump reelected. maybe i'm wrong, but this is one aspect i really don't understand about this whole hunter biden scandal
did they not realize they were getting him elected in 2016 with their wall-to-wall coverage of him until after it happened or something?
I suspect most serious politicians and even business ghouls want Biden in.
Democratic presidents and presidential hopefuls have generally tried to portray themselves primarily as responsibly managing the empire (which includes doing imperialism, just with a friendly face and in order to help women in oppressive regimes, etc etc)
Biden’s obviously not going to be tough on anything but petty crimes (so usual slap-on-the-wrist shit for businesses and banks doing whatever the fuck they want), he wants to work with republicans, etc.
So that’s why I think it makes sense for basically all powerful people to support Biden; he’s obviously not a threat, while trump threatens the perceived legitimacy of the US. I dunno about Greenwald, but that’s why I’d expect all but the most die-hard pro-trump media to be trying to push for Biden, if subtly, and probably trying to push Biden to the right with the questions and framing they use with him.
That's media criticism because Glenn is a free speech guy. There's no materialist or leftist analysis in his essay, it's just standard free speech warrior stuff.
idk, i'll defend The Shock Doctrine though, that book was influential in radicalizing me.
Let me say this in JavaScript so it's crystal clear to you mouth breathers:
If (Glen Greenwald === liberal && Naomi Klein === liberal) { Move along }
