Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 19 submissions in the queue.
posted by martyb on Thursday May 29 2014, @02:22AM   Printer-friendly
from the anyone-who-expects-to-give-up-freedom-for-security-will-get-neither dept.

Glenn Greenwald at The Intercept writes A Response to Michael Kinsley

Kinsley has actually done the book a great favor by providing a vivid example of so many of its central claims. For instance, I describe in the book the process whereby the government and its media defenders reflexively demonize the personality of anyone who brings unwanted disclosure so as to distract from and discredit the substance revelations; Kinsley dutifully tells Times readers that I "come across as so unpleasant" and that I'm a "self-righteous sourpuss" (yes, he actually wrote that). I also describe in the book how jingoistic media courtiers attack anyone who voices any fundamental critiques of American political culture; Kinsley spends much of his review deriding the notion that there could possibly be anything anti-democratic or oppressive about the United States of America.

But by far the most remarkable part of the review is that Kinsley--in the very newspaper that published Daniel Ellsberg's Pentagon Papers and then fought to the Supreme Court for the right to do so (and, though the review doesn't mention it, also published some Snowden documents)--expressly argues that journalists should only publish that which the government permits them to, and that failure to obey these instructions should be a crime.

I can't say I want my government to have its fingers in what is and what is not reported.

See also: Cory Doctorow's review of Greenwald's book at BoingBoing

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by zim on Thursday May 29 2014, @05:01AM

    by zim (1251) on Thursday May 29 2014, @05:01AM (#48569)
    It's ok. They didn't make a 'law' abridging the freedom of press.

    They just kicked the last guy who said things they didn't like in the face and ruined his life forever.

    See. Legal. No law.

    Be well citizen. Now pick up that can.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Insightful=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 29 2014, @06:50AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 29 2014, @06:50AM (#48599)

    The joke's on Them. That Guy was already dead inside since his wife left him, and picking up cans is an easy and rewarding job.

    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by snick on Thursday May 29 2014, @01:34PM

      by snick (1408) on Thursday May 29 2014, @01:34PM (#48719)

      You're not listening.

      The GP wasn't saying it was Bush's fault. They were agreeing that the media is more interested in being playas than in reporting the news.

      But yeah, a Dem/Rep food fight is a good distraction from the real problem, so ... well done.