SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Editor's summary: BuzzFeed, a media outlet and Pulitzer Prize finalist, obtained leaked emails from Breitbart News, some of which were published in Buzzfeed's roughly 9,000-word exposé of the site's inner workings. The article chronicles the rise of Milo Yiannopoulos, Breitbart's tech editor, and his relationship with Steve Bannon, the recent White House Chief Strategist who left the Trump administration and resumed his position as executive chairman of Breitbart News in August. It also details exchanges between Yiannopoulos and people such as Peter Thiel, Devin Saucier, and Curtis Yarvin, among others. The article shows how Breitbart "smuggled white nationalist ideas into the mainstream" by using Yiannopoulos as a go-between for white nationalists and others in his following, who provided him with story tips and constructive (?) criticism.
Vice Media has fired Mitchell Sunderland, an editor and writer for Broadly, Vice's women-focused site. Sunderland emailed Yiannopoulos and encouraged him to mock the feminist writer Lindy West. He also sent a Broadly video about the Satanic Temple and abortion rights to Tim Gionet, Yiannopoulos's tour manager, resulting in this story. Dan Lyons, a writer for the TV series Silicon Valley and author of Disrupted: My Misadventure in the Start-Up Bubble, and David Auerbach, a former technology writer for Slate, also passed along news tips to Breitbart. Auerbach has vociferously denied writing the emails.
Milo Yiannopoulos responded on Thursday, mainly taking issue with a video of him singing karaoke while Richard Spencer and others raised Nazi salutes. Yiannopoulos wrote, "I have said in the past that I find humor in breaking taboos and laughing at things that people tell me are forbidden to joke about. Everyone who knows me has seen me make jokes about some awful things. But everyone who knows me also knows I'm not a racist. As someone of Jewish ancestry, I of course condemn racism in the strongest possible terms. I have stopped making jokes on these matters because I do not want any confusion on this subject. I disavow Richard Spencer and his entire sorry band of idiots. I have been and am a steadfast supporter of Jews and Israel. I disavow white nationalism and I disavow racism and I always have. I have severe myopia, due to a congenital eye defect, as has been widely reported and as many people know or have seen from my squinting during public speeches. In a dark bar, I did not see these hand gestures. If I'd have realized white nationalist losers were hailing me as their leader, I'd have immediately walked off stage. I stand for, as always, race-blind nationalism. Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm enjoying my honeymoon with my black husband."
Broadening Brush: Alt-White, Buzzfeed Exposé!
BuzzFeed has published documentation of the direct connection of Breitbart News, the alt-right movement, and Milo Yiannopoulos to white supremacists and neo-Nazi groups:
In August, after a white nationalist rally in Charlottesville ended in murder, Steve Bannon insisted that "there's no room in American society" for neo-Nazis, neo-Confederates, and the KKK.
But an explosive cache of documents obtained by BuzzFeed News proves that there was plenty of room for those voices on his website.
During the 2016 presidential campaign, under Bannon's leadership, Breitbart courted the alt-right — the insurgent, racist right-wing movement that helped sweep Donald Trump to power. The former White House chief strategist famously remarked that he wanted Breitbart to be "the platform for the alt-right."
The article is extensive, quoting from emails from the Breitbart organization itself.
In March, Breitbart editor Alex Marlow insisted "we're not a hate site." Breitbart's media relations staff repeatedly threatened to sue outlets that described Yiannopoulos as racist. And after the violent white supremacist protest in Charlottesville, Virginia, in August, Breitbart published an article explaining that when Bannon said the site welcomed the alt-right, he was merely referring to "computer gamers and blue-collar voters who hated the GOP brand."
These new emails and documents, however, clearly show that Breitbart does more than tolerate the most hate-filled, racist voices of the alt-right. It thrives on them, fueling and being fueled by some of the most toxic beliefs on the political spectrum — and clearing the way for them to enter the American mainstream.
Sometimes, it is good to know who you are lying down with, so you will know why you have fleas. And sometimes, journalists ought to "follow the money." I highly recommend reading the article, "Here's How Breitbart And Milo Smuggled Nazi and White Nationalist Ideas Into The Mainstream".
Liberal collusion with Alt-right! Shocking!
Now the Salon is getting into the fray, reporting on BuzzFeed's dump of Breitbart emails and pointing out that many liberal journalists are implicated.
A recently released cache of email correspondence revealed direct collaboration between popular alt-right website Breitbart and purported white nationalists and neo-Nazis. While the revelations are damning, they are not entirely surprising to those who follow Breitbart's editorial strategies. More shocking, perhaps, is that a number of purportedly liberal journalists have also secretly colluded with Breitbart over the years.
Again, this is a lengthy article, well worth the read, that goes into detail on the relations of Breitbart News to other journalistic entities, and political extremists. One example:
The surprising journalistic connections to Yiannopoulos include David Auerbach, a tech critic who has contributed extensively to Slate and has been published in intellectual left magazines like n+1, Triple Canopy, and even the Nation, one of the most esteemed voices of the American left. Auerbach once wrote a longform piece of cultural criticism for Triple Canopy exploring how the politics of anonymous online forum culture (A-Culture, in his parlance) eventually evolved into the fusion of libertarianism and racist nationalism that we now associate with sites like 4chan, 8chan and Reddit in its prelapsarian days.
Though anonymity does not play directly into the majority of the discussions on forums associated with A-culture, it is responsible—along with the written nature of the discourse—for the characteristics that have emerged from those sites. . . . Anyone entering into an A-culture forum is likely to witness a nonstop barrage of obscenity, abuse, hostility, and epithets related to race, gender, and sexuality. Anyone objecting to this barrage will immediately attract a torrent of even greater abuse. These forums maintain an equilibrium of offense designed to drive away anyone who is not sympathetic to the general libertarian mindset.
But it does seem that Buzzfeed has stirred up a hornet's nest of buzzing, the type of thing that may even attract buzzards.
Shortly thereafter, Auerbach tweeted that he had "told [Buzzfeed editor Ariel Kaminer] that this stuff was untrue. He's currently trying to put words in my mouth." Auerbach went on to speculate that "Buzzfeed might have it in for me because I criticized Buzzfeed chair Keith Lerer for hiring 4chan's founder." "I also criticized Buzzfeed's business model in NYMag," he added. "So yeah, they're probably pissed at me."
More about sexism and male privilege than racism. Or more of a cat-fight among journalists and whatever those who work for Breitbart are. As Alice said, "Curiouser and curiouser."
(Score: 1, Troll) by Ethanol-fueled on Sunday October 08 2017, @08:13PM (32 children)
Yeah, hearing shit like this drivel is almost verbatim the kind of hysterical bullshit that cause me to switch radio stations after years of NPR to Fox Sports.
Even with such a hysterical summary there's nothing damning, so it resorts to MUH NAZIS.
Now, I like Breitbart for providing a counterpoint but even I will admit that they dog-whistle out the ass and I'm not that fond of the God stuff in there either, but nobody else is going to report nationally crime committed by illegal immigrants or how San Francisco is an unsustainable clusterfuck. It's the best we have so far for a decent counterpoint to liberal retardism that ain't full-on Westboro Baptist. It's the best place (other than /pol/) to read how Trump and Pence troll and bamboozle the living fuck out of liberal morons.
I think it is pretty juvenile how they embrace web spelling in their headlines and the rest of their articles could also use better proofreaders.
But racist? White nationalist? The best dirt you're gonna get is that they occasionally contact a relatively small percentage of White Nationalists for the sake of what common ground they do have rather than endorsement of White Nationalism.
LOLZ. Awaken, The Mighty Buzzard! They challenge you!
(Score: 3, Insightful) by c0lo on Sunday October 08 2017, @08:31PM (15 children)
FTFY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 1) by Ethanol-fueled on Sunday October 08 2017, @08:39PM
Takyon is a capable writer and very well-mannered, I really enjoyed his 4/20 articles and he's put up with a good lot of my shit in IRC.
But sometimes I just don't agree with him, and that's perfectly damn fine if he doesn't agree with me either.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday October 08 2017, @08:41PM (10 children)
They can do both. Personally, I'm flattered.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Sunday October 08 2017, @08:45PM (9 children)
The free speech being a prerequisite. of course if it's a challenge here is also an exercise of free speech
The only issue is the intention: did they intend to challenge you or have they stopped at the free speech level only?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 3, Funny) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday October 08 2017, @11:56PM (8 children)
If I'm the one challenged, I get to pick the means of the duel, right? I choose single malt Irish whiskey.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday October 09 2017, @08:06AM (7 children)
Remind me not to challenge you: I hate whiskey, can't stand the stink of it.
On the other side, nothing beats a deeply chilled vodka, at some -17C or less.
Only perhaps some plum brandy, distilled at about 75% AVB (in both cases accompanying food, bacon and/or mature cheese preferred, is needed for a long run. Otherwise my old, well pickled liver will let me down after the first bottle).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday October 09 2017, @10:47AM (6 children)
Too cold on the vodka. I've had actual tissue injury from swallowing overly cold vodka before.
I can't back you on the brandy either but I could go with as much plum wine as necessary to resolve things. Fair warning though, I can drink sweet wines easier than water as long as they're made from anything but grapes.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday October 09 2017, @11:52AM (5 children)
Pour it in a 30-4 ml shot glasses at room temperature and they will get pretty around -10C -8C.
In that small quantity even in bottoms up style (the proper one), it can't actually cause frost damage.
Hell, no, you couldn't.
At equiv amount of alcohol - 75%ABV double distilled plum brandy [wikipedia.org] vs 10%AVB the strength of wine, you'll need to drink quite a large amount of liquid.
At my 0.5l of plum brandy I can afford to nibble food all the way through the bottle, no sweat in 3-4 hours.
At the same alcohol amount, you'll have to drink almost a gallon of wine.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday October 09 2017, @12:32PM (1 child)
Not a problem. Mind you, there will be side effects. All that liquid has to go somewhere after processing.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday October 09 2017, @12:48PM
As long as you are able to deal with it in a civilized way (without affecting me), I have no issues.
Each one is free to do with their bodily fluids as he pleases; I'll chalk it down as, albeit unusual, pertaining to freedom of expression.
Even more so if you manage to "paint" a coherent message on the snow in dealing with processes liquids
(no, projectile vomit is not a valid result of processing, it's a sign of an aborted process)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by JeanCroix on Monday October 09 2017, @05:09PM (2 children)
150 proof? My preferred brands are Maraska or Navip, and I haven't even been able to find their old 100 proof strengths for years - it's all 80 these days, here in the US anyway. Which stuff do you like?
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday October 09 2017, @08:44PM (1 child)
Oh, haven't had that stuff for seems like thousands years, that is something migrating my ass from East Europe into Australia led to.
Anyway, to get to that strength you'll need to arrange with the distiller, one simply can't buy this stuff off the shelf.
The result is usually stored in some unappealing PET recycled bottles (which you wash carefully), but it's simply divine.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by JeanCroix on Tuesday October 10 2017, @12:10PM
(Score: 2) by Gaaark on Sunday October 08 2017, @11:51PM (2 children)
Just as MB exercises HIS right to free speech.
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 09 2017, @02:51AM (1 child)
What's a "MB"? I have heard tell of a "TMB", but not of this "MB" of which you speak. Is it some kind of "Master Bater"?
(Score: 3, Touché) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday October 09 2017, @03:18AM
Damnit, did I leave my webcam on again?
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 08 2017, @08:56PM (5 children)
NPR today is as corporatist whore as 'commecial' radio/media.
PBS in general is and has been for decades, as evidenced to anyone trying to get copies of Mr Roger's Neighborhood or back issues of Reading Rainbow.
Hint: Both are disney-level impossible to get because both are being kept in vaults by their family members decades later.
(Score: 5, Informative) by takyon on Sunday October 08 2017, @09:10PM (2 children)
What does that have to do with PBS? Sounds like a problem with the copyright holders. PBS doesn't get to magically violate copyright law.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mister_Rogers%27_Neighborhood#Broadcast_history [wikipedia.org]
Family Communications Inc. was renamed to The Fred Rogers Company [wikipedia.org].
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 3, Interesting) by bzipitidoo on Monday October 09 2017, @08:38AM
Some years ago, the PBS News Hour did a story on copyright. They went with their favorite format of finding two opposing experts to argue each side. Problem was, for that story the two sides were "extreme copyright" and "even more extreme copyright", with questions such as whether 75 years was long enough, and one expert saying "yes" while the other said "no". The thought that 75 years might be far too long was completely ignored. It was the most unbalanced, flagrantly fraudulent reporting I've ever seen on the News Hour, which until then I had thought a cut above.
I had thought that being, you know, publicly funded as reflected in the "Public" part of their very name, meant they might strive to put the interests of their patrons, the public, first. Nope. Their journalists closed ranks with what they evidently thought were their own, the journalists of the corporate media world and the ownership scoundrels of the MAFIAA, defending Holy Copyright from the evil pirates of the Internet Age.
Sesame Street is pretty tough to get. Much of the funding for Sesame Street comes from the public, yet they refuse to release it under a copyleft license, or to the public domain.
That's hardly all. The reporting on Latin America is routinely filtered through a corporatist lens. To hear the mainstream media tell it, those crazy Latin Americans are always ruining their economies with lurches to the political left. Cuba, Venezuela, and a bit less often Brazil are trash talked in this fashion. PBS News Hour is no exception to that tone. For a different view, I suggest reading Greg Palast and Noam Chomsky. Foreign sources (such as, possibly, Al Jazeera) also have potential. I warn you though, when you still have faith that the US system of journalism can't possibly get things too wrong because we have Freedom of Speech and competition to keep them honest, Palast and Chomsky will come across as batshit nuts when you first start reading them. Praising Hugo Chavez as the best thing that ever happened to Venezuela? WTF? But then, when you start to think maybe they aren't completely crazy, maybe they're on to something, maybe even correct, you'll feel depressed by the scope of the bias that implies in the mainstream media, I didn't want to believe the US was that dirty and corrupt.
One of the biggest blunders the mainstream media made in recent times was the reporting on the cause for going to war in Iraq in 2003. Yes, PBS News Hour was in lockstep with the rest of them. After all the carnage, to learn that there never were any Weapons of Mass Destruction, except in Saddam Hussein's imagination, was sickening. The media totally failed to keep the Bush Administration honest. Moreover, the Bush Administration didn't give a crap about facts, and really would run a massive propaganda campaign, something that wasn't appreciated enough until it was too late for a whole lot of Iraqis. And what are the Democrats doing about all that? Giving the Republicans the roasting and butt kicking they so richly deserve? No. Instead the Democrats are making leftish noises while actually practicing fascist corporatism lite, and trying to pass that off as The Left, with ample help from the mainstream media. In a sense, that makes the Republicans more honest than the Democrats! The Republicans' propaganda is clumsy and obvious. Not so the Democrats. Slick bastards.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 10 2017, @05:41AM
As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Fred Rogers approaches 1.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by hemocyanin on Monday October 09 2017, @12:37AM
I stopped listening to NPR about halfway through Obama's reign when I realized it was never going to call him out on the right wing GWBesque shit he was doing.
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Monday October 09 2017, @05:29PM
You are right that NPR is as biased as all get-out. You're wrong about exactly what that bias is, though. Here it is in a nutshell:
"This is radio for comfortable and well-off people. When our news stories report terrible things happening, you don't need to worry, it will never affect you, it's sad but it's happening to those poor people way over on the other side of the world/country/state. We're going to read off a bunch of announcements from whoever the president is without questioning a word of it or providing anything that might cause you to question it, because if we do the government will pull that segment of funding we get from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. Now, here's a pointless and uninformative interview with a justifiably obscure artistic type whose work is banal but we're going to treat like a genius for some reason."
PBS at least tries to create some entertaining and educational shows, although they've definitely fallen a long way from their bits of actual brilliance like Where in the World is Carmen Sandiego? and Sesame Street back when Jim Henson was involved.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 5, Informative) by takyon on Sunday October 08 2017, @09:05PM (8 children)
Leaked documents/emails are news. They've been fine online news since the early days of WikiLeaks and Cryptome. That's all the justification needed to run this.
The BuzzFeed article doesn't go as far as saying that the news tips Breitbart received were untrue (and in some cases they were just calling attention to what was out there, like the Satanic Temple video). Breitbart did provide counterpoints. Some of those counterpoints were suggested to them by self-described white supremacists/nationalists. You can conclude whether that is good/bad/neutral. An initial chunk of the article suggested that these people helped define the "alt-right":
No one person or group can really claim ownership of the term "alt-right". It's muddled just like every other ideology out there. But it seems like Breitbart played a big role in defining the "alt-right" for many people.
There's also the aspect of liberal journalists secretly supporting Breitbart's cause, asking Milo to bash specific feminists, etc. Regardless of how one feels about that, I think most of us can agree that angle is interesting and damn funny.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0, Redundant) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 08 2017, @09:39PM (3 children)
Heck there was even that recent one where WSJ claims an _unamed_ bunch claimed that Russian AV stole NSA stuff...
(Score: 2) by takyon on Sunday October 08 2017, @10:11PM (2 children)
Let's assume that [soylentnews.org] was a true story for a second. Is that too much of a stretch? I hope not.
The story is that the breach happened in 2015 and was discovered in spring of 2016. Before the election. Around the same time many other things were happening WRT Russia. Later, you see the U.S. govt getting increasingly pissy towards Kaspersky Lab until finally banning it on all federal computers.
The conclusion is clear. The Russians were doing more meddling at the time than is immediately obvious. The details will trickle out years later, as they tend to do. As for alleged unnamed sources putting the story out there, get used to it, since there is a mix of condoned and forbidden leaking going on. The Obama administration went hard after whistleblowers/leakers and the Trump administration has signaled that they will do the same. Many sources will stay anonymous if they don't feel like being imprisoned.
Personally, I think the Russian spy agencies decided to throw everything at the wall and see what sticks. Hack a few state databases, buy some polarizing ads on Facebook, etc. Most of it doesn't qualify as "hacking the election", but it could have had some effect. Were the Russians responsible for the DNC emails? Maybe [time.com], maybe not [thenation.com]. But I don't think we will need to wait 50 years to get a clear picture of what really happened.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 09 2017, @04:02AM (1 child)
Assuming that story is true then it would be a GOOD THING for everyone else because then the NSA will have to its other job of protecting US stuff and tell Microsoft, Cisco etc to prevent those hacking tools from working.
NONE of it qualifies as hacking the election unless the voting machines or totals were hacked.
The DNC hacking even if done by the Russians isn't hacking the election, it's illegal/vigilante journalism.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Monday October 09 2017, @05:49AM
I can agree to that, although in the short term those NSA tools caused a lot of pain:
https://techcrunch.com/2017/05/12/ransomware-based-on-leaked-nsa-tools-spreads-to-dozens-of-countries/ [techcrunch.com]
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2, Troll) by jmorris on Monday October 09 2017, @03:01AM (3 children)
They can claim anything, but anyone who doesn't laugh is dumb. The Alt-Right preexisted the first BB article. All they did was some actual journalism. They heard of a new political movement, went out and researched, contacted what looked like central figures in the factions they discovered to exist and interviewed them. They then wrote up an article, sent it back out to their interview subjects for comments and corrections and then reported to their readers. The article was well received, re-reported in most of the mainstream media, etc. None of that implies in the slightest any sort of definition or creation of the Alt-Right. Vox Day's sixteen point checklist is considered one of the most reliable definitions since it encompasses all of the significant factions instead of only some of them.
I do wish the rules would settle out at some point. I remember CNN almost going into autistic screeching about the DNC Leaks, shouting how it was ILLEGAL and even talking about it was probably criminal. Now we have the internal emails of a journalistic operation hacked, and everyone admits Milo's account was hacked so shut up, and suddenly it seems ok. So lets be clear, everyone is perfectly fine with targeting and hacking journalists now. Just asking, because if New York Times leaks shows up it doesn't look like anyone gets to say a goddamned word now. And we are all ok with that? Hack the planet, publish all the secrets, all that old 90's hacker stuff for real now?
Buckle up, the ride is about to get bumpy.
Yea, that was choice stuff. Expected though, everyone can see this train wreck coming. Even, probably especially, the left activists. But they are caught in a holiness spiral and there is no figure with enough authority on the Left to break them out of it before it spins up to a full singularity and eats the whole Left. At least some are willing to try, almost kinda hopeful actually. They were quietly acting over a year before it broke out into full retard "Free Speech is White Privilege" insanity. If I weren't a hardened bastard who knows what vile people they are I'd feel pity for what is going to happen to them. But I don't. I'll make popcorn when it goes full cannibalism and won't make the mistake of allowing the survivors into the Right camp.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Monday October 09 2017, @03:08AM (1 child)
I don't really care what CNN has to say about leaking. Most of the people you see on there are paid to read, talk, and look good on camera.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 09 2017, @09:01AM
You're not their target audience.
The Russians did their propaganda stuff and tried to influence the voters (not the same as hacking the election). And CNN etc did their propaganda stuff and tried to influence the voters.
CNN etc are now trying to spread the idea that the election results are invalid just because allegedly the Russians did a better job influencing the voters.
But the hard truth is the Democrats lost the election by fielding a weaker candidate. They use lame excuses like racism and the electoral college but the fact is a black guy won twice! The Democrats wanted Trump as their opponent, they "elevated" him.
That the DNC still try to blame everyone else for their failures is not a good sign.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 10 2017, @04:47AM
>> Leaked documents/emails are news.
> I do wish the rules would settle out at some point. I remember CNN almost going into autistic screeching about the DNC Leaks, shouting how it was ILLEGAL
CNN saying it doesn't make it true. Do you really think that any soylents thought the DNC leaks weren't news?
"You didn't like it before, you can't have it now" doesn't apply to truth values of statements, nor to newsworthiness.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 08 2017, @11:29PM
They are shoving the "god stuff" down your throat. Wait until Tribune media is taken over, that will make it even worse. There has never been a crackdown of these frauds on tv who are hawking religions and begging for money. They will be the first ones to put their boots on your neck for not conforming. I thought this crap was going away as I get older, but it seems to be getting worse. 1950's and the Crusades all over again. Sad days for the United States of America. ;_;