Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room
Kiss Encryption Goodbye... :*
Renegade:
47 minute audio interview (Fresh Air on NPR) with Washington Post's Barton Gellman on Snowden NSA leaks.
http://www.npr.org/2013/09/11/221359323/reporter-had-to-decide-if-snowden-leaks-were-the-real-thing
-mouser (September 12, 2013, 02:19 PM)
--- End quote ---
I listen to enough NPR on the radio in the car, and it's rarely anything other than what it is - state funded news. The highlights all seem to aim at damage control.
I do wish there were a video interview.
^That Fresh Air interview of Gellman is definitely worth listening to in its entirety. :Thmbsup:
-40hz (September 12, 2013, 03:34 PM)
--- End quote ---
Hmmm... Curiouser and curiouser...
40hz:
47 minute audio interview (Fresh Air on NPR) with Washington Post's Barton Gellman on Snowden NSA leaks.
http://www.npr.org/2013/09/11/221359323/reporter-had-to-decide-if-snowden-leaks-were-the-real-thing
-mouser (September 12, 2013, 02:19 PM)
--- End quote ---
I listen to enough NPR on the radio in the car, and it's rarely anything other than what it is - state funded news. The highlights all seem to aim at damage control.
-Renegade (September 12, 2013, 07:04 PM)
--- End quote ---
That's rather funny since that's pretty much what the arch conservatives, the religious right-wingers, the political lunatic fringe and their ilk invariably say about NPR whenever it doesn't cover or tell a news story the way they think it should.
;D :P
Renegade:
That's rather funny since that's pretty much what the arch conservatives, the religious right-wingers, the political lunatic fringe and their ilk invariably say about NPR whenever it doesn't cover or tell a news story the way they think it should.
;D :P
-40hz (September 13, 2013, 04:40 AM)
--- End quote ---
Hahaha! :Thmbsup:
Well, I'm certainly not an "arch conservative".
I'm pretty darn far from being a "religious right-winger". It would be difficult to be less of that.
POLITICAL LUNATIC FRINGE! You've nailed it! YES! That's me! 8)
Let it soak in...
A bit longer...
Soaked yet? ;)
Yep. I'm not kidding. If I had my way, there would be no coercive state. I am that "political lunatic fringe" that, well, I'll skip that. (Would make for a really fun discussion though! ;D )
That being said, when I listen to NPR, I'm hyper critical.
The other thing is that the state shouldn't be covering the news. Any way they cover it is wrong, because they shouldn't be covering it at all. Even when I like a story, and even if I agree with what's being said, I can't help but wonder why are they telling people this? (I'll drop that there as it's another topic.)
But if you look at the highlights, I wasn't wrong. They're skewed. They sound like:
What they sound like to me"But you weren't burned with cigarettes or cut with a knife and no bones were broken during the rape?"
"No, but..."
"Nothing further, your Honour. Move to dismiss."
I've not finished listening to the interview yet though. FWIW, he seems reasonable on a lot of things, and I did really like some of the things he has said so far. (I'll finish it later.)
40hz:
^Dunno. I thought Gellman did an admirable job of sticking to the truth as he knows it. And I'd also credit the interviewer for simply handing him a concise group of questions at one point that neatly summarized most of the nonsensical chatter that's been floating around in order to give him the opportunity to refute them from the perspective of an actual insider in the Snowden story.
I also admired Gellman as much for what he refused to say - and the NPR interviewer for graciously accepting that refusal and not pushing it like many of the mainstream news channel interviewers would have.
None of that sounds like state sponsored propaganda to me.
If it were, the interviewer would have attempted to make Gellman look like a ring-tailed baboon with rapid-fire leading questions and inference tossing like the neo-con talk show hosts so love to do.
At the end of this interview I think Snowden emerges in a much better light than many would have given him credit for. And the same goes for Gellman who also got to show how (contrary to the administration and intelligence community's allegations and unsupported assertions) the Washington Post displayed a huge degree of discretion and restraint in what they did publish when presenting the Snowden story to the American public.
As Gellman pointed out, Snowden (or the three news sources he shared his data with) could have easily done a raw data dump to Wikileaks or a mirroring network at any time. And there would have been very little that 'the powers that be' could have done to prevent it.
The fact that the Washington Post did speak and consult with the government to minimize release of certain technical and operational details - details which would have done little to advance the story - shows good judgment IMHO. Especially since the big picture that has emerged is damning enough - and more than sufficient to establish just how extensive and serious a problem we have right now.
Which supports the Washington Post's argument that they published with no intention other than to inform the general public of what was going on - and set a debate in motion.
Which it did.
All in all, I think it was handled rather well on NPR and the WP's part. 8)
Renegade:
Finished the interview there. It was very good.
Gellman's take on the criminality of the leaks and reporting was interesting. I also liked his take on being paranoid. :Thmbsup:
Off-topic about mediaNone of that sounds like state sponsored propaganda to me.
-40hz (September 13, 2013, 01:52 PM)
--- End quote ---
We're unlikely to agree on some things there. Have you ever skimmed though "Manufacturing Consent" or "The Engineering of Consent"? (Chomsky and Bernays, respectively.) (I've already blithered on about my skepticism of the media in general. I'm only slightly more skeptical of NPR reporting. More blathering to follow below. ;) )
The neutral tone of NPR is a refreshing departure from the utter drivel and gnashing of teeth that you get in the MSM, but it's still state run media. The content of any particular discussion on NPR is generally irrelevant - that they are framing the discussion is the important part. Demographics make a big difference here. Your average "beer, football & reality TV" zombie doesn't listen to (or watch) NPR. NPRs audience, well, nuff said.
If it were, the interviewer would have attempted to make Gellman look like a ring-tailed baboon with rapid-fire leading questions and inference tossing like the neo-con talk show hosts so love to do.
-40hz (September 13, 2013, 01:52 PM)
--- End quote ---
I don't know why people always go on about the "neo-con talk show hosts" being douches. Sure, Rush Limbaugh has a solid douchebaggery score. So do other right-aligned commentators. But why does nobody ever point out the douchebaggery of the left-aligned commentators? Well, except for a few. It's consistent through a lot of media, and even in "right" media like Fox sometimes.
Here are a few examples of leftist commentators that really just go way the heck off into Lala-land.
MSNBC - Melissa Harris-Perry (wants to kidnap children). Alex Wagner (can't not ask a leading question to save her life).
ABC - Whoopi Goldberg (exercising rights is "terrorism" - I'm not making that up).
CNN - Piers Morgan (oh god... makes Alex Wagner look tame).
We could go on and on. They're extremely dishonest, if not delusionally insane.
It's not left/right media that's dishonest - it's all of them.
Now, to NPR's credit, there is pretty much none of the crap that you get with Limbaugh, Morgan, or the rest of the MSM. This makes NPR much less entertaining. e.g. It's pretty hard to top the insane drivel that comes out of Melissa Harris-Perry's mouth, which makes for a good laugh if you don't end up vomiting and bashing your head against the wall.
Neo-con or neo-liberal - which flavour of turd would you like?
In general, I think it's good to get a solid balance of turds in your diet. One pollutes your pallet with a different set of pathogens so you don't get bored of always having crappy meals. :P
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version