Thread: Glenn Greenwald on Corporate Media

 

I no longer regularly browse Twitter, but a recent thread by Glenn Greenwald caught my attention. It accords with Power Line’s The Three Whisky Happy Hour: Election Schadenfreude Edition. There, Steve Hayward and “Lucretia” called on a 2023 Republican congressional majority to hold aggressive hearings, hauling all the major media bosses in front of them to make them squirm over the past five years of lies and deep deception. They took as their touchstone Big Story, the important history of our media (deliberately?) grossly misreporting the Tet Offensive, thereby turning the American public against the war for the first time, to the advantage of the Vietnamese communists, Mao, and the USSR.

In that context, consider Glenn Greenwald‘s story in several tweets.

Good morning. I’d like to make 3 points: 1) The vast majority of disinformation, propaganda and lies that flooded the country over the last 5 years did not come from MAGA boomers on Facebook or 4Chan teenagers but the largest and most influential liberal corporate media outlets.
6:15 AM · Nov 7, 2021

2) These are not cases where media outlets erred. They deliberately lied. The way to know that is they refuse to acknowledge evidence proving they lied. Remember they just *ignored* @SchreckReports book proving the Biden emails were real. Now this:

6:17 AM · Nov 7, 2021

3) By far the best and most accurate reporting on all matters relating to Russiagate came not from the liberal corporate outlets that want to censor the internet in the name of disinformation or which shower themselves with Pulitzers for lies, but from the right-wing press.

The reporters who know most about Russiagate and did distinguished facts from lies — @ChuckRossDC, @MZHemingway, @JerryDunleavy, along with a few young journalists who risked their careers in left-wing media: @aaronjmate
& @mtracey — are the ones you’ve been told to ignore.

A few people objected to my statement yesterday that hatred of them is just. Think about this: they spent weeks before the 2020 election spreading the CIA lie that the Biden emails were “Russian disinformation,” but when a POLITICO reporter disproved that, they ignored his book.

These are the world’s most pompous, smug, self-righteous people. They never stop telling they’re the guardians of democracy and truth. But then when they get *caught lying* — when irrefutable evidence emerges debunking their lies — they ignore it. How is that not contemptible?

I’ve been a vocal critic of liberal corporate media since I began writing 15 years ago – it’s why I started – and especially so the last 5 years. But that escalated when they just *ignored* @SchreckReports ‘ book proving they lied about the Biden emails.

New Proof Emerges About the Hunter Biden Laptop: a Definitive Account of the CIA/Media Fraud

We all know exactly which outlets and media personalities spent the weeks before the 2020 election spreading the CIA’s lie: the Biden emails were “Russian disinformation.” They know who they are. How do they sleep knowing they lied about this, then ignoring this book proving it??

And now that the real facts about the [REDACTED] Russiagate fraud are finally emerging — the people who concocted it are getting arrested and the media propagandists they used are exposed — this is the only acknowledgment and self-critique we’re going to get. Just: “whoops”:

6:39 AM · Nov 7, 2021

https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1457354950057529347?s=20

Glenn Greenwald has the receipts,* in popular jargon. Add this now to the 2023 Republican agenda. Look for “leaders” who sign onto aggressive hearings now. If the Democrats can conduct January 6 hearings, there is some colorable “legislative purpose” to investigation of media corporations’ willful or somehow disastrously (for the republic) yet fortuitously (for the left) wrong, all in the same direction for five years, with extensive coordination with one political party and federal executive agencies.

I note that much of the same gang benefited as in 1968: the Chinese communists and the Russian regime.


* Evidence or proof. Often in the form of screenshots or saved snaps.

Published in Journalism
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 46 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. The Reticulator Member
    The Reticulator
    @TheReticulator

    kedavis (View Comment):

    The Reticulator (View Comment):

    Not really. I think a track record of “trusting” him makes it more difficult to call him out if and when it appears necessary.

    That may never happen, and, as we’ve read here, “truth is truth.” Still, I’m not going all in for anyone who wrote for The Guardian.

    So more like, the left will yell “Why don’t you believe him now? You believed him when he agreed with you!”

    ?

    I didn’t write the words you quote me as saying.  But I’m not going all in for anyone who writes for the Guardian, either. Nor am I going all in for anyone who writes for the Washington Times, or the Limbaugh Letter, or for Ricochet.   It’s true that I give more of the benefit of the doubt to those who have been known to tell the truth, but that’s not the same as simply believing them.

    • #31
  2. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    The Reticulator (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    The Reticulator (View Comment):

    Not really. I think a track record of “trusting” him makes it more difficult to call him out if and when it appears necessary.

    That may never happen, and, as we’ve read here, “truth is truth.” Still, I’m not going all in for anyone who wrote for The Guardian.

    So more like, the left will yell “Why don’t you believe him now? You believed him when he agreed with you!”

    ?

    I didn’t write the words you quote me as saying. But I’m not going all in for anyone who writes for the Guardian, either. Nor am I going all in for anyone who writes for the Washington Times, or the Limbaugh Letter, or for Ricochet. It’s true that I give more of the benefit of the doubt to those who have been known to tell the truth, but that’s not the same as simply believing them.

    That’s weird, I just tried highlighting the same text as before and clicking “reply” and it worked correctly.

    • #32
  3. Hoyacon Member
    Hoyacon
    @Hoyacon

    The Reticulator (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):
    I’m not questioning Greenwald in the present, nor the assessment of his reporting. My opinion is rather simple–I don’t trust him and our concurrence with his viewpoints may pose difficulty if and when his socialist associations come to the fore. I trust “us,” but it becomes more difficult to distrust someone when there is a track record of trusting him. I think that I’m repeating myself.

    Do you think he would lie, coverup, and engage in a smear campaign in order to oppose us?

    Where “journalists” are concerned, I never discount anything.

    • #33
  4. Clifford A. Brown Member
    Clifford A. Brown
    @CliffordBrown

    Let’s see here. I started the OP with Steve Hayward and “Lucretia” of Power Line’s “Three Whisky Happy Hour.” It is they who called for a prospective Republican congressional majority to conduct hard-hitting hearings into the past 5 years of major media calling it spectacularly wrong and all in one direction, with bad consequences in the bureaucracy and in misshaping public perception.

    I then unrolled a Glenn Greenwald Twitter thread that makes the case for willful deception by the major professional media.

    Yet, most of the comment thread has debated/disparaged one of the messengers, which really benefits the major professional media. By the way, I found the Greenwald thread through Senator Ted Cruz quoting him. I did not cite Cruz in the OP because the words, images, and embedded videos stand on their own.

    Does anyone have thoughts on the proposed hearings?

    • #34
  5. The Reticulator Member
    The Reticulator
    @TheReticulator

    Clifford A. Brown (View Comment):

    Let’s see here. I started the OP with Steve Hayward and “Lucretia” of Power Line’s “Three Whisky Happy Hour.” It is they who called for a prospective Republican congressional majority to conduct hard-hitting hearings into the past 5 years of major media calling it spectacularly wrong and all in one direction, with bad consequences in the bureaucracy and in misshaping public perception.

    I then unrolled a Glenn Greenwald Twitter thread that makes the case for willful deception by the major professional media.

    Yet, most of the comment thread has debated/disparaged one of the messengers, which really benefits the major professional media. By the way, I found the Greenwald thread through Senator Ted Cruz quoting him. I did not cite Cruz in the OP because the words, images, and embedded videos stand on their own.

    Does anyone have thoughts on the proposed hearings?

    All Congressional hearings should be conducted to inform the process and content of legislation. I don’t know if Congress is capable of doing that on this topic without running afoul of the First Amendment.

    • #35
  6. Clifford A. Brown Member
    Clifford A. Brown
    @CliffordBrown

    The Reticulator (View Comment):

    Clifford A. Brown (View Comment):

    Let’s see here. I started the OP with Steve Hayward and “Lucretia” of Power Line’s “Three Whisky Happy Hour.” It is they who called for a prospective Republican congressional majority to conduct hard-hitting hearings into the past 5 years of major media calling it spectacularly wrong and all in one direction, with bad consequences in the bureaucracy and in misshaping public perception.

    I then unrolled a Glenn Greenwald Twitter thread that makes the case for willful deception by the major professional media.

    Yet, most of the comment thread has debated/disparaged one of the messengers, which really benefits the major professional media. By the way, I found the Greenwald thread through Senator Ted Cruz quoting him. I did not cite Cruz in the OP because the words, images, and embedded videos stand on their own.

    Does anyone have thoughts on the proposed hearings?

    All Congressional hearings should be conducted to inform the process and content of legislation. I don’t know if Congress is capable of doing that on this topic without running afoul of the First Amendment.

    Congress’s scope of inquiry and the term “legislative purpose” is quite broad. Apparently, if they target a particular private individual, then they are out of bounds, but the major media corporations are big boys. See Facebook, Twitter, and Google. The left would cry “First Amendment” but to no avail.

    Consider the apparent coordination between the DOJ/FBI and a major news network to have cameras present at a predawn raid of Paul Manifort’s home.

    Take the side of the people’s right to know the truth, and the whole truth.

    • #36
  7. Clifford A. Brown Member
    Clifford A. Brown
    @CliffordBrown

    Scott Johnson provides an excellent summary, with links, of other detailed criticisms of media conduct in the Russia hoax: “Anatomy of the Clinton hit job.” It includes links to a lengthy editorial by the NY Post editorial board, and a hard-hitting critique by the Washington Post media critic, including this passage:

    The Danchenko indictment doubles as a critique of several media outlets that covered Steele’s reports in 2016 and after its publication by BuzzFeed in January 2017. As discussed in this series, CNN, MSNBC, Mother Jones, the McClatchy newspaper chain and various pundits showered credibility upon the dossier without corroboration — and found other topics to cover when a forceful debunking arrived in December 2019 via a report from Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz.

    • #37
  8. The Reticulator Member
    The Reticulator
    @TheReticulator

    Clifford A. Brown (View Comment):
    Congress’s scope of inquiry and the term “legislative purpose” is quite broad.

    You would think that with a such a broad purpose, they could make effective use of it. But it seems they don’t know how.  Maybe we need to help them know how. 

    • #38
  9. Clifford A. Brown Member
    Clifford A. Brown
    @CliffordBrown

    The Reticulator (View Comment):

    Clifford A. Brown (View Comment):
    Congress’s scope of inquiry and the term “legislative purpose” is quite broad.

    You would think that with a such a broad purpose, they could make effective use of it. But it seems they don’t know how. Maybe we need to help them know how.

    Yes, the default mode is for each congress critter to give a speech and maybe ask questions, often both prepared by staff, without any coordination, any plan by the Democrat or Republican side. Each rides their own little hobby horse, looking for their own little bit of video for fundraising and reelection. We have all seen and likely shared such.

    The exceedingly rare exception is a professionally directed, coordinated, line of questioning, with a goal in mind.

    • #39
  10. GrannyDude Member
    GrannyDude
    @GrannyDude

    “They took as their touchstone Big Story, the important history of our media (deliberately?) grossly misreporting the Tet Offensive, thereby turning the American public against the war for the first time, to the advantage of the Vietnamese communists, Mao, and the USSR.”

    Happy Marine Corps Birthday,  Happy Veterans Day, Dad.  Semper Fi.

    • #40
  11. Dbroussa Coolidge
    Dbroussa
    @Dbroussa

    Clifford A. Brown (View Comment):

    Let’s see here. I started the OP with Steve Hayward and “Lucretia” of Power Line’s “Three Whisky Happy Hour.” It is they who called for a prospective Republican congressional majority to conduct hard-hitting hearings into the past 5 years of major media calling it spectacularly wrong and all in one direction, with bad consequences in the bureaucracy and in misshaping public perception.

    I then unrolled a Glenn Greenwald Twitter thread that makes the case for willful deception by the major professional media.

    Yet, most of the comment thread has debated/disparaged one of the messengers, which really benefits the major professional media. By the way, I found the Greenwald thread through Senator Ted Cruz quoting him. I did not cite Cruz in the OP because the words, images, and embedded videos stand on their own.

    Does anyone have thoughts on the proposed hearings?

    I will reiterate my comment at #13…the media is one of the forces that are attempting to run the country, but they are not the most immediate danger.  That is the bureaucracy.  The GOP can have all the hearing that they want to and it won’t make a difference at all because the elected officials are not in charge of anything except for their re-election campaigns.  If they win in 22, and if they have the intestinal fortitude to actually call for hearings, and the biggest IF of all, if they are competent in those hearings (when was the last time you saw THAT from the GOP), then it still won’t matter because the elected officials don’t actually have any power over the bureaucracy.  Until that changes (fat chance there), its all theater.

    • #41
  12. BDB Inactive
    BDB
    @BDB

    Sorry, Cliff.  All I have here is black pills.  So I’ll just keep it to myself.

    • #42
  13. Hoyacon Member
    Hoyacon
    @Hoyacon

    Dbroussa (View Comment):

    Clifford A. Brown (View Comment):

    Let’s see here. I started the OP with Steve Hayward and “Lucretia” of Power Line’s “Three Whisky Happy Hour.” It is they who called for a prospective Republican congressional majority to conduct hard-hitting hearings into the past 5 years of major media calling it spectacularly wrong and all in one direction, with bad consequences in the bureaucracy and in misshaping public perception.

    I then unrolled a Glenn Greenwald Twitter thread that makes the case for willful deception by the major professional media.

    Yet, most of the comment thread has debated/disparaged one of the messengers, which really benefits the major professional media. By the way, I found the Greenwald thread through Senator Ted Cruz quoting him. I did not cite Cruz in the OP because the words, images, and embedded videos stand on their own.

    Does anyone have thoughts on the proposed hearings?

    I will reiterate my comment at #13…the media is one of the forces that are attempting to run the country, but they are not the most immediate danger. That is the bureaucracy. The GOP can have all the hearing that they want to and it won’t make a difference at all because the elected officials are not in charge of anything except for their re-election campaigns. If they win in 22, and if they have the intestinal fortitude to actually call for hearings, and the biggest IF of all, if they are competent in those hearings (when was the last time you saw THAT from the GOP), then it still won’t matter because the elected officials don’t actually have any power over the bureaucracy. Until that changes (fat chance there), its all theater.

    I do agree, but just wanted to add that a useful part of reforming the bureaucracy would be through a nonpartisan media that held the bureaucrats accountable.

    • #43
  14. Dbroussa Coolidge
    Dbroussa
    @Dbroussa

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    Dbroussa (View Comment):

    Clifford A. Brown (View Comment):

    Let’s see here. I started the OP with Steve Hayward and “Lucretia” of Power Line’s “Three Whisky Happy Hour.” It is they who called for a prospective Republican congressional majority to conduct hard-hitting hearings into the past 5 years of major media calling it spectacularly wrong and all in one direction, with bad consequences in the bureaucracy and in misshaping public perception.

    I then unrolled a Glenn Greenwald Twitter thread that makes the case for willful deception by the major professional media.

    Yet, most of the comment thread has debated/disparaged one of the messengers, which really benefits the major professional media. By the way, I found the Greenwald thread through Senator Ted Cruz quoting him. I did not cite Cruz in the OP because the words, images, and embedded videos stand on their own.

    Does anyone have thoughts on the proposed hearings?

    I will reiterate my comment at #13…the media is one of the forces that are attempting to run the country, but they are not the most immediate danger. That is the bureaucracy. The GOP can have all the hearing that they want to and it won’t make a difference at all because the elected officials are not in charge of anything except for their re-election campaigns. If they win in 22, and if they have the intestinal fortitude to actually call for hearings, and the biggest IF of all, if they are competent in those hearings (when was the last time you saw THAT from the GOP), then it still won’t matter because the elected officials don’t actually have any power over the bureaucracy. Until that changes (fat chance there), its all theater.

    I do agree, but just wanted to add that a useful part of reforming the bureaucracy would be through a nonpartisan media that held the bureaucrats accountable.

    That is a good point, and a nonpartisan media is based in an education system that doesn’t embed a leftist ideology.  I’m OK with starting with the media, but I am not holding my breath that anything will happen.

     

    • #44
  15. Old Bathos Member
    Old Bathos
    @OldBathos

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    Dbroussa (View Comment):

    Clifford A. Brown (View Comment):

    Let’s see here. I started the OP with Steve Hayward and “Lucretia” of Power Line’s “Three Whisky Happy Hour.” It is they who called for a prospective Republican congressional majority to conduct hard-hitting hearings into the past 5 years of major media calling it spectacularly wrong and all in one direction, with bad consequences in the bureaucracy and in misshaping public perception.

    I then unrolled a Glenn Greenwald Twitter thread that makes the case for willful deception by the major professional media.

    Yet, most of the comment thread has debated/disparaged one of the messengers, which really benefits the major professional media. By the way, I found the Greenwald thread through Senator Ted Cruz quoting him. I did not cite Cruz in the OP because the words, images, and embedded videos stand on their own.

    Does anyone have thoughts on the proposed hearings?

    I will reiterate my comment at #13…the media is one of the forces that are attempting to run the country, but they are not the most immediate danger. That is the bureaucracy. The GOP can have all the hearing that they want to and it won’t make a difference at all because the elected officials are not in charge of anything except for their re-election campaigns. If they win in 22, and if they have the intestinal fortitude to actually call for hearings, and the biggest IF of all, if they are competent in those hearings (when was the last time you saw THAT from the GOP), then it still won’t matter because the elected officials don’t actually have any power over the bureaucracy. Until that changes (fat chance there), its all theater.

    I do agree, but just wanted to add that a useful part of reforming the bureaucracy would be through a nonpartisan media that held the bureaucrats accountable.

    Those journalists can be found over by the candy cane mountain next to the unicorn ranch.

    • #45
  16. BDB Inactive
    BDB
    @BDB

    There’s a simple solution to all of this:  Start 80 years ago.

    • #46
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.