Corrente

If you have "no place to go," come here!

The mad dash to demonize Greenwald

athena1's picture

I would post this at FDL, but it seems inappropriate there.
But TBogg sees us, and categorizes us in with Alex Jones types. But, anyway...

(If you have nothing to hide, why are you worried?)

I have to give the Bogger credit for being the first to call out "advocacy journalism".

In no way is the way that Greenwald is reporting this “straight journalism”. It’s advocacy journalism that just happens to coincide with his pet hobbyhorse.

Source: http://tbogg.firedoglake.com/2013/06/10/me-god-are-watching-skynet-grow/ Bold mine.

Of course, Taibbi watches all of this:

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog/hey-msm-all-journali...

Bogg is in a strange position. Taibbi is on his blogroll. GREENWALD is on his blogroll. So, Bogg has to try to discredit folks with "I like him, BUT" statements.

But you have to give Bogg credit. His homespun "advocacy journalism" meme really did make it into the "mainstream". He and his handful of commenters really are a mean, lean meme propagating machine.

5
Average: 5 (1 vote)

Comments

goldberry's picture
Submitted by goldberry on

The people A list bloggers/journalists put on their blogroll, I'll never understand. The Confluence has been banned for 5 years now for being prematurely correct but Tbogg gets a pass from just about everyone even though he's a proven Obot toe-sucker who's been wrong about just about everything.

True liberals who hold fast on civil liberties, keynesian economics and the new deal get the cold shoulder while the faux variety thrive.

Go figure.

jo6pac's picture
Submitted by jo6pac on

reason I don't bother with tbugg it's a waste of time but Matt always fun and pretty much nails it each time.

Rangoon78's picture
Submitted by Rangoon78 on

I don't get it.

The guy you cite above says

Compared to Vasya and Limonov, Snowden is a fucking clown.

And then he goes on:

Greenwald has spent years promoting and enforcing an image of himself as an infallible crusader and arbiter of big words like “heroism,” “patriotism,” “ethical,” “transparency,” “liberty” and the like.

You don't agree with these statements do you lambert?

Submitted by lambert on

... but when you look at what Ames did in his journalistic context, the ire becomes a little more understandable.

And then there is the issue of Greenwald's libertarianism as well. I'm all for "strange bedfellows" but I don't want any pinholes in the latex either, to use a perhaps overly vivid technical (not gender)-related metaphor.

So I think it's an excellent contextualization and well worth a read. Which doesn't in my view (or in Ames's when he's not fulminating) detract one iota from Greenwald or Snowden's very real accomplishments.

Submitted by lambert on

Just as dangerous as what Greenwald + Snowden are doing, except for many years of his life. Russia when the oligarchs were sorting things out was Mad Max territory, and there he was in the midst of it all, running a newspaper. Not to denigrate, only to compare, in a sprint vs. marathon way.

Rangoon78's picture
Submitted by Rangoon78 on

Not to denigrate? Well ok then. Like the comedian who said if you preface a slam with "with all due respect."

Submitted by lambert on

If I had wanted to slip in the shiv with "all due respect" that's what I would have written.

Read the piece. Years of work running a satirical newspaper in a violent country without law and the Russian mob whacking people they don't like, or that the oligarchs paid them not very much money to move into "no man, no problem" mode. IMNSHO, Snowden and Greenwald's risks, significant as they are, aren't of the same order; if you don't like "sprint" vs. "marathon" then use "battle" vs. "war" or "wound" vs. "ongoing trauma." I think Ames has the right to be cranky about this (and he is cranky) even if the crankiness makes his message harder to hear.

It should be obvious this doesn't detract from my respect for what Snowden and Greenwald are doing; heck, I link to it and post on it all the time, no?

Rangoon78's picture
Submitted by Rangoon78 on

I must admit I overreacted to your bringing comparison in to the discussion. There are degrees of journalistic bravery. You have certainly acknowledged the earth shattering nature of the NSA revelations. Sorry.

Here was a brave one:

On June 20, 1979, international correspondent Bill Stewart was shot and killed by Nicaraguan government forces as he was reporting from Managua.

Bill Stewart was mindful of his environment. As he approached an outpost of the Nicaraguan National Guard, Stewart was holding a white flag and documentation of press credentials issued by the Nicaraguan government, Time reported.

Stewart fell to his knees after one of the soldiers on duty lifted his rifle. The officer on guard instructed the reporter to lie down, and shot Stewart behind his right ear. According to Time, the soldiers also killed Stewart’s interpreter, Juan Francisco Espinoza. ABC’s camera crew caught the gruesome scene on tape.

The assassination struck a final blow to the Somozas’ already waning international support.
Bill Stewart was mindful of his environment. As he approached an outpost of the Nicaraguan National Guard, Stewart was holding a white flag and documentation of press credentials issued by the Nicaraguan government, Time reported.

Stewart fell to his knees after one of the soldiers on duty lifted his rifle. The officer on guard instructed the reporter to lie down, and shot Stewart behind his right ear. According to Time, the soldiers also killed Stewart’s interpreter, Juan Francisco Espinoza. ABC’s camera crew caught the gruesome scene on tape.

The assassination struck a final blow to the Somozas’ already waning international support.
http://www.findingdulcinea.com/news/on-this-day/May-June-08/On-this-Day-...

Submitted by hipparchia on

Greenwald is no Seymour Hersh; Snowden is no Ellsberg; Rand Paul is not Frank Church, and Wydall is not Gravel

i agree with ames on this.

Submitted by lambert on

Contextualize, contextualize.

Alexa's picture
Submitted by Alexa on

Personally, I've read very little of Ames, and very little of Greenwald. I vaguely recall that he had a column called "Unchained _________." (sorry, was it Territory?)

Now, I have watched Greenwald on "Democracy Now" (and in a couple other forums), and was very much impressed with his mental acumen during interviews, debates, etc.

Personally, if I ever got the opportunity to debate Greenwald, and even came away with a "draw," I would definitely feel like I'd had a good day, LOL!

But, I'm not a "fan" of his, any more than I would be of a any bureaucrat, politician, or partisan political hack.

If he started talking "gibberish" tomorrow, I'd denounce him so fast, that you'd see the dust flying.

The "personalities" of these guys (or their resumes) are sort of a distraction, IMO.

Submitted by lambert on

Latex is safe sex.

Submitted by Hugh on

Mark Ames did not like some of Glenn Greenwald's reporting on him and this colors Ames' reporting on Greenwald. A weakness of Ames' writing is that it tends to engage in personalities. I have my own issues with Greenwald. Primarily, that much like FDL while he criticizes Democrats, especially Obama, he has never publicly and consistently broken his ties with them and espoused alternatives to them.

In any case, the pushback in the Snowden affair was predictable. Snowden and those around him, i.e. Greenwald were going to be smeared. Snowden's father is being used against him. That was a nice touch. MSM "journalists" were going to question both Snowden and Greenwald for every speeding ticket and jaywalking citation in their lives. It is just icing on the cake to get people like TBogg or Ames to pile on. I think the term "hero" is way overused. But it is schizophrenic to, on the one hand, hope for people who will stand up to the powers that be, and then try to crush, diminish, and dismiss those who do.

The next phase in the anti-Snowden pro-surveillance state conflict will be the inevitable onset of Snowden fatigue and the attempt to tie this fatigue to the NSA revelations. "Oh, the NSA was so yesterday. Can we talk about something else?" This will allow the PTB to return to spying as usual.

Submitted by lambert on

... and Ames. Ames is a journalist a lot like Hunter Thompson, who came out of Moscow as the oligarchs took over just like Taibbi did. TBogg is just a washed-up blogger with a tired act.

Roman Berry's picture
Submitted by Roman Berry on

Primarily, that much like FDL while he criticizes Democrats, especially Obama, he has never publicly and consistently broken his ties with them ...

There are no ties there to break. Greenwald does not identify himself as a Democrat. Never has to my knowledge. In fact, he doesn't identify himself along any party lines that I am aware of.

Alexa's picture
Submitted by Alexa on

Many MSM journalists, and even bloggers, appear to resent Greenwald.

Heard one of them (Julie Mason, host of The Press Pool) own up to it last week. At least she was honest about her feelings, but only after she interviewed a so-called journalist who did somewhat of a "hit piece" on Greenwald.

And TBogg--certifiable, maybe, LOL!

Think Hugh's nailed it:

In any case, the pushback in the Snowden affair was predictable. Snowden and those around him, i.e. Greenwald were going to be smeared. Snowden's father is being used against him. That was a nice touch.

MSM "journalists" were going to question both Snowden and Greenwald for every speeding ticket and jaywalking citation in their lives. It is just icing on the cake to get people like TBogg or Ames to pile on.

If Snowden's Father is being used against him--it's his own fault. Look, I "feel for" Mr. Snowden. But again, what on earth kind of attorney would advise any parent to publicly interject themselves into a situation like Snowden's.

Remember, he hasn't even talked to his son since April. How on earth could he presume to "speak for him."

And siding against WikiLeaks may impress some in Mr. Snowden's inner circle, (if that's his goal--who knows?), but I hardly think that it helps his Son's defense. Quite the opposite.

And, it gives the MSM something more to "make light" (fairly or not), considering the absurdity of his "suggestions" to the State Department and the Administration.

We live in a nation that prosecutes very young children for first-degree murder, regardless of the most heinous extenuating circumstances.

Did Mr. Snowden really believe that he could curry favor with the American Public by blaming Wikileaks for his "30 year old" son's actions? C'mon, now.

(BTW, I'm one of those 'liberals' who is sickened by the prosecution of very young children, some of whom are so young that they couldn't possibly even have any concept of "death." The fact that this happens in this society sickens me.)

So, I'm simply trying to make the point that--"generally"-- we live in a society that doesn't even have the capacity to show compassion to a young child.

So, I can't imagine that blaming the actions of a 30-year-old young adult on an "organization" is going to go anywhere with" the American People."

athena1's picture
Submitted by athena1 on

I dunno. Ames has long loathed Glenzilla because of some paid speech Glen gave to CATO during the Bush era regarding the wrongness of surveillance and torture.

All good journalists are cynical. We live in an era where cynicism is warranted. But it's a fine line between cynicism and paranoia. And I think Ames' dial is turned a bit in favor of the latter, sometimes. That doesn't mean Ames is automatically wrong. For the most part, I see him as one of The Best investigative journalists around. His worldview about rightwing "elites" has forever colored my own "lens" through which I view the world of domestic politics and geopolitics.

But the Exiled staff doesn't therefore get a free pass anymore than FDL, or the Dem Party. I'm honestly a bit unnerved to see Ames propagating Dem party memes.

Submitted by lambert on

... I was out on the threads for awhile during the "direct access" concern trolling, and Greenwald definitely has fans, who act like fans everywhere do.

On "emoprog," yeah, that's too bad. Is he even using it correctly?!

Alexa's picture
Submitted by Alexa on

I'll post some of Reid's own words describing an "emoprog."

I don't remember how Ames used it, but I think that he implied a pejorative (correctly of incorrectly). But I could be wrong. I couldn't access his piece again, to refresh my memory.

Most bloggers here are probably not "emoprogs." Or at least those bloggers who were involved in the Obama/Clinton "war," would probably not have the mindset that Ms Reid objects to.

I figure that because being involved in an intra-Party fight would usually indicate at least some degree of party loyalty, etc.

It's actually mostly Dems (or former Dems) who criticize the Dem Establishment, and who believe that the Dem Party cannot "be saved" from within, that she disdains and vilifies. She would consider them to be "purists."

Submitted by lambert on

Emoprog seems to be owned (and now discarded) by these guys, because they seem to have decided to kick the left and punch the hippies using other words. This is classic:

Example2: Emoprogs dismissed healthcare reform as a failure, saying President Obama should have used the bully pulpit to achieve a single payer system, despite the fact that Sen. Harry Reid made it clear that such a plan could not pass the Senate.

Well, if Harry Reid says it, that's good enough for me! No link, but if Reid said so because of the filibuster, that's a choice the Democrats made in 2009, and to say otherwise is a Big Lie.

Alexa's picture
Submitted by Alexa on

same thing, really.

Here's what I consider the most salient characteristics, which are usually not shared by Democratic Party loyalists:

Emo Progressive (or “emoprog”) is a self-described liberal or progressive, often with strong libertarian leanings, whose primary political orientation is to be angry, dissatisfied and unhappy with the state of the nation at any given time, because in their view, liberal policies are not being implemented quickly enough or articulated forcefully enough. They have particular contempt for Democratic presidents.

Emoprogs are ideological purists who disdain compromise and incremental change, which they see as “selling out” classical liberal ideas like full employment, an end to all wars, state secrets, and liberal social policy.

Emoprogs dislike Republicans but reserve their greatest disdain for Democratic presidents, whom they relentlessly attack for not meeting a set of ideological goal posts that are constantly adjusted to ensure that the president will be deemed a disappointment, “not progressive enough” or “just like a Republican” no matter what policy achievements are made.

I've rarely seen bloggers who vote for the mainstream corporatist Dems, consistently demonstrate these characteristics.

And when Joy-Ann Reid makes reference to progressives who "vote third party" to punish Dems--well, what can I say?

This woman is absolutely clueless. That she even makes it onto so-called "left radio," amazes me. (But since I have an "off button," I can deal with it, LOL!).

Anyway, that's my take on her . . .

Alexa's picture
Submitted by Alexa on

of like "sparkle ponies," huh?

Joy-Ann Reid, who helped coin the phrase "emoprog," is an ultra-conservative Dem.

Heck, I have to turn off the radio or get out my 'hip waders' when she shows up on Mark Thompson's radio program.

To be charitable, Reid is a real piece of work!

Submitted by lambert on

The opposite of a pragmasturbator?

I must be quite isolated and innocent; nobody's ever called me an emoprog.

athena1's picture
Submitted by athena1 on

I'm pretty sure you must have been labeled an emoprog at some point. We all have, whether we like it or know it or not. It's similar to being called an Occutard.

I think we're faced with a choice - wear the label like armor, or succumb to the weakness the label seeks out.

Alexa's picture
Submitted by Alexa on

and consider it a "badge of honor" . . .

I don't think Reid generally uses this term to describe Democratic Party partisans.

Mostly she's referring to individuals who "vote third party, etc." (Not who tow the Democratic Party line, as she does.)

Listen to her sometime on Mark Thompson's show on XM Radio (if you can). I "think" he may be on a few actual radio stations, other than satellite radio.

Alexa's picture
Submitted by Alexa on

anyone who would vote for a conservative, corporatist and/or Establishment Dem.

IOW, she would never us this term for anyone who supports Obama or Clinton (or Biden, Bayh, Deval, Booker, etc., etc.).

She writes for an ultra-conservative (Dem) blog.

She would direct this pejorative at someone like "moi." ;-)

IOW, leftists who don't tow the (corporatist) Democratic Party line, might be the best way to explain it.

To my understanding, it is not a part of the Obama/Clinton "wars."

But I could be wrong. I trust that someone will correct me if I am, LOL!

ek hornbeck's picture
Submitted by ek hornbeck on

As with all humans of independent will Glenn is right on many things but wrong on others. I have permission to quote him when it suits me and ignore him when I don't.

It's about the message not the messenger anyway.

But speaking of the messenger, why the hell is an unreconstructed fascist like TBogg still allowed to post on Firedog Lake? He loves dogs? Hitler loved Blondie too.

Then, of course, he poisoned her in the bunker.

Submitted by jawbone on

tp behave. Or believe...or speak.

From Wikipedia:

"Toe the line" is an idiomatic expression meaning either to conform to a rule or standard, or to stand poised at the starting line in a footrace. Other phrases which were once used in the early 1800s and have the same meaning were toe the mark and toe the plank.

"Tow the line" means pulling on a tow line to move a barge down a canal or towing a boat line.

Sometimes, maybe, "tow the line" might apply to those like TBogg who often, while "toeing the line," pull stuff out of some nether portion of the human anatomy. But it's done in service to the PTB's of the Dem Party.

Repubs have their own but similar means of "towing" to best "toe the line."

Daleks were genetically modified to have no response except "Exterminate!" to any being not like themselves. That is pretty strong toeing the line.

Alexa's picture
Submitted by Alexa on

Joy-Ann Reid by saying, "even the lovely Joy Ann-Reid--a future superstar and already on the road to greatness.”

I had no idea that she was on MSBNC, too. And that's on top of the addition of Michael "No Labels" Smerconish.

Jeeeezzzz!!!!

Alexa's picture
Submitted by Alexa on

apparently he left his terrestrial radio stations to become a "No Labels" Radio Moderator, along with Tim Farley on the POTUS Channel of XM Radio. (And host a 2 or 3 hour, M-F, talk radio show, obviously).

Two other illustrious MSNBC hosts--Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski are also "No Labels" members.

Yeah, MSNBC's real liberal, LOL!

Submitted by Hugh on

Per Glenn Greenwald's wiki, he has called for working outside the two party structure. However, he was supporting some Democrats as recently as 2012. He has not made his call to work outside the two party system central to his writing. He has not outright rejected the Democrats the way say that he has rejected the Republicans. He has not explored what such a rejection would mean, as in what comes after the two parties.