General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsNo, Glenn Greenwald didn’t ‘vow vengeance.’ He said he was going to do his job.
The Reuters report focused on Greenwald’s “they will be sorry” comment and implied that Greenwald would be publishing more documents in response to the government’s decision to detain his partner. Greenwald took issue with the framing, saying the Reuters report neglected to include key context, including the questions that prompted his comments. He tweeted out this paraphrase of his conversation with the press:
Q: Will the UK’s detention of your partner deter your future reporting?
A: Absolutely not. If anything, it will do the opposite. It will embolden me: I have many more documents to report on, including ones about the UK, where I’ll now focus more. I will be more aggressive, not less, in reporting.
Q: What effect do you think they’ll (sic) be of the UK’s detention of your partner?
A: When they do things like this, they show the world their real character. It’ll backfire. I think they’ll come to regret it.
But other news organizations had already followed Reuters’ lead in sticking to the narrative that Greenwald was threatening the British government over the incident. The Huffington Post’s headline blared: “Greenwald vows vengeance,” while many others hooked on to the alleged ”sorry” comment.
Once again, nuance is shown to be the enemy of authoritarianism and its spin doctors.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
cthulu2016
(10,960 posts)Greenwald's comments, as made, strongly implied a targeted response to the UK action. (Even with the translation cleaned up.)
The Reuters characterization of that "threat" was too strong... too unambiguous.
The Huffington Post headline is journalistic malpractice. Real clown-show stuff.
Greenwald did shoot off his mouth a little, but the threat was only implicit and thus the Reuters piece was, in how it reported, as much interpretation as straight reporting.
He did not, "Vow Vengeance" in the way such purple prose implies.
hobbit709
(41,694 posts)GliderGuider
(21,088 posts)99th_Monkey
(19,326 posts)they took liberties using the V and/or R words (vengeance & revenge)
in an article headline claiming to paraphrase Glenn.
ocpagu
(1,954 posts)It did backfire. Now international organizations, governments, etc., are all referring to UK as a medieval, authoritarian state - and they are right to do so, detaining partners of journalists under accusation of terrorism is something that not even those pathetic and fascist Banana-republic-dictatorships in Latin America did during the times of Pinochet, Castelo Branco et al.
Not sure they'll regret it, though.
GliderGuider
(21,088 posts)None that they'll admit in public, at any rate.
Rockyj
(538 posts)But this demonizing the messenger needs to stop!
MelungeonWoman
(502 posts)Thanks for posting this, I was able to trash the other thread without even looking at it.
tridim
(45,358 posts)Yea whatever, clown.
Poor, poor Glenn.
OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)"To be clear: Barack will support a filibuster of any bill that includes retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies."
Obama's wiretapping flip-flop? Yes
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2008/jul/14/obamas-wiretapping-flip-flop-yes/
In October 2007, Obama spokesman Bill Burton issued this unequivocal statement to the liberal blog TPM Election Central: "To be clear: Barack will support a filibuster of any bill that includes retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies."
~snip~
Obama supported an amendment that would have stripped telecom immunity from the measure. But after that amendment failed, Obama declined to filibuster the bill. In fact, he voted for it. It passed the Senate, 69-28, on July 9. The House passed the same bill last month, and Bush said he would sign it soon. (McCain missed the vote because he was campaigning in Ohio, but he has consistently supported the immunity plan.)
In a message to supporters, Obama defended his position, citing a phrase Democrats fought to include that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act is the "exclusive" means of wiretapping for intelligence. The bill "is far better than the Protect America Act that I voted against last year... (because it) makes it clear to any president or telecommunications company that no law supersedes the authority of the FISA court."
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)be intimidated by an oppressive state determined to do just that. I love it when people stand up for what they believe and refuse to be frightened by Bullies. Good for him.
Where exactly do you see him looking like 'poor Glenn'? Fascinating to see this kinds of comments with zero backing for them which is why I always like to ask for the background. Most of the time though, there is none.
tridim
(45,358 posts)Poor poor Glenn, now playing the victim.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)kelliekat44
(7,759 posts)Journalism is not a right to slash and burn, and dis misinformation.
one_voice
(20,043 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)see his own words, seems to be that he did no such thing. Is there something else we have not seen, if so, could you post it? But what we know now shows no sign of what has been claimed, it was a lie, unless you have something to show us that we all missed.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)Everyone is using that word in connection to Greenwald. The number of individuals corroborating what Greenwald has published, and their relevant knowledge of security matters, make the charge of "misinformation" a hollow one.
uhnope
(6,419 posts)the Guardian. At least the NSA conduct internal audits and publicizes the results admitting its mistakes. There's still far to go in reforming the NSA, but that doesn't excuse these irresponsible drama junkies running around playing hero-journalist and whistleblower/spy
JoeyT
(6,785 posts)don't give the first damn about facts.
You can pretty much expect a "Well....It might not have been true, but I'm going to believe it anyway because Greenwald sux! So there!" attitude toward this.
uhnope
(6,419 posts)Greenwald said he's going to increase disclosures, get more aggresssive, in reaction to his life partner's detention. Yes, that sounds like vowing vengeance. It could be summarized other ways, but as a headline it's pretty accurate.
Greenwald does not act like a responsible member of his profession. Now he's acting like a drama junkie or someone whose priority is self-serving fame (and now revenge) over the truth.
GliderGuider
(21,088 posts)They more eye that see this, the better. 
uhnope
(6,419 posts)
SaveOurDemocracy
(4,400 posts)............................
leftstreet
(36,097 posts)The media SHOULD increase disclosures, SHOULD be bolder
SHOULD do their job
The media need to stop acting like simpering press release employees and court jesters of the wealthy elite
uponit7771
(90,301 posts)...aliens cause someone said they exsited?!
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)that contrary to what the UK wanted, which they have said 'to intimidate him', he responds to THAT by saying very firmly 'No, it will not work, I will be even more determined to do my job.'
A response to a threat is not a threat, it is a RESPONSE to a threat.
Do you support any government doing what was done to his family member and then admitted that it was done 'to intimidate Greenwald'?? You seem to have no problem with the Government's threatening innocent people who have committed no crime, but find the RESPONSE to the threats from a powerful government to be worse??? Are you really serious about that?
tridim
(45,358 posts)railsback
(1,881 posts)Everyday, someone has to go out and 'reinterpret' the words and phrases coming out of the mouth of someone not too bright...
jaysunb
(11,856 posts)GliderGuider
(21,088 posts)
jaysunb
(11,856 posts)at a friends home he was film maker. Got it. Thanks
uhnope
(6,419 posts)what he actually said. That's not paraphrasing, that's walking back your regrettable words. He did indeed say all this, all together, which could understandably be summarized in a headline as vowing vengeance:
"I will be far more aggressive in my reporting from now. I am going to publish many more documents. I am going to publish things on England too. I have many documents on England’s spy system. I think they will be sorry for what they did."