Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

limpyhobbler

(8,244 posts)
Wed Jul 17, 2013, 12:48 AM Jul 2013

From Tom Paine to Glenn Greenwald, we need partisan journalism

By Jack Shafer

I would sooner engage you in a week-long debate over which taxonomical subdivision the duck-billed platypus belongs to then spend a moment arguing whether Glenn Greenwald is a journalist or not, or whether an activist can be a journalist, or whether a journalist can be an activist, or how suspicious we should be of partisans in the newsroom.
...

Greenwald’s collaborations with source Edward Snowden, which resulted in Page One scoops in the Guardian about the National Security Agency, caused such a rip in the time-space-journalism continuum that the question soon went from whether Greenwald’s lefty style of journalism could be trusted to whether he belonged in a jail cell. Last month, New York Times business journalist Andrew Ross Sorkin called for the arrest of Greenwald (he later apologized) and Meet the Press host David Gregory asked with a straight face if he shouldn’t “be charged with a crime.” NBC’s Chuck Todd and the Washington Post‘s Walter Pincus and Paul Farhi also asked if Greenwald hadn’t shape-shifted himself to some non-journalistic precinct with his work.
...

In the 1960s, the best opinionated, fact-based journalism appeared in such books as Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring (1962), Betty Friedan’s The Feminine Mystique (1963), Jessica Mitford’s The American Way of Death (1963), Michael Harrington’s The Other America (1963), and Ralph Nader’s Unsafe at Any Speed (1965). The lefties at Ramparts magazine broke stories on Michigan State University fronting for the CIA (1966), the use of napalm in Vietnam (1966), and the CIA funding of the National Student Association (1967). Later revelations in the early to mid-1970s by the New York Times and the Washington Post (and others) about the Pentagon Papers, Watergate, and intelligence agency abuses were, at their root, as partisan as any of the NSA investigations Glenn Greenwald has contributed. Remember, as Christopher B. Daly recently pointed out, Daniel Ellsberg chose to leak the Pentagon Papers to New York Times reporter Neil Sheehan because he 1) trusted Sheehan from their years in Vietnam, and 2) had recently read a long essay-review Sheenan had written for the paper’s book section titled “Should We Have War Crime Trials?” As Daly writes, “Three months later, Sheehan wrote the first front-page article in the series that became known as the Pentagon Papers.”
...

My paean to activist and partisan journalism does not include the output of the columnists and other hacks who arrange their copy to please their Democratic or Republican Party patrons. (You know who you are.) Nor do I favor the partisan journalists who insult reader intelligence by cherry-picking the evidence, debate-club style, to win the day for their comrades. Click and read a few of the articles I cite above and then ask yourself: Where would we be without our partisan journalists?
complete piece:
http://blogs.reuters.com/jackshafer/2013/07/16/from-tom-paine-to-glenn-greenwald-we-need-partisan-journalism/
23 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
From Tom Paine to Glenn Greenwald, we need partisan journalism (Original Post) limpyhobbler Jul 2013 OP
So Headline says " we need (partisan) journalism as from Greenwald ...... pkdu Jul 2013 #1
He's not willing to have that discussion because the discussion is stupid. Luminous Animal Jul 2013 #3
He s a journalist cos I said so...no discussion. Right. Another "source" worth ignoring. Nt pkdu Jul 2013 #5
Advocacy journalism against the "Crown" was suppressed and why freedom of such Luminous Animal Jul 2013 #9
I'm not questioning his First Amendment rights, just his quals as a " journalist " but pkdu Jul 2013 #10
No. You are worried that he might have an agenda. Luminous Animal Jul 2013 #13
Nope. Dont tell me , what I'm worried about. Let me tell you. Nt pkdu Jul 2013 #23
Greenwald isn't a lefty: he's a libertarian struggle4progress Jul 2013 #2
I'll believe the person who supports the social safety net, supports 100% public funding of election Luminous Animal Jul 2013 #6
You don't know squat about me, and you won't find a single post by me struggle4progress Jul 2013 #8
And you won't find a single word from Greenwald opposing any of the above either. Luminous Animal Jul 2013 #12
Actually, with respect to candidates, Greenwald typically adocates voting 3rd party or not voting: struggle4progress Jul 2013 #14
Since Greenwald supported the Citizens United decision, which sweepingly overturned existing struggle4progress Jul 2013 #15
I support it too. Because limiting corporate speech shuts down Luminous Animal Jul 2013 #17
100% public financing won't get past Citizens United struggle4progress Jul 2013 #18
We need journalists who won't suck corporate dick. nt OnyxCollie Jul 2013 #4
Writers who provide accurate facts are more useful than those who don't, whatever their allegiences struggle4progress Jul 2013 #11
Greenwald is one of the most important journalists today quinnox Jul 2013 #7
I think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone here... BlueCheese Jul 2013 #16
Fox "news" is the epitome of partisan journalism sigmasix Jul 2013 #19
how is it "new"? it goes back forever though. nt limpyhobbler Jul 2013 #20
The definition of "journalists" matter if they have special legal privileges denied to others FarCenter Jul 2013 #21
Virtually all journalism is controlled by RW capitalists so we have advocacy journalism. We need byeya Jul 2013 #22

pkdu

(3,977 posts)
1. So Headline says " we need (partisan) journalism as from Greenwald ......
Wed Jul 17, 2013, 01:00 AM
Jul 2013

But first para says I'm not willing to discuss if he's a journalist....


And please...." Rip in the time-space-journalism continuum " .... Gag.

Luminous Animal

(27,310 posts)
9. Advocacy journalism against the "Crown" was suppressed and why freedom of such
Wed Jul 17, 2013, 01:27 AM
Jul 2013

was included in the first amendment.

pkdu

(3,977 posts)
10. I'm not questioning his First Amendment rights, just his quals as a " journalist " but
Wed Jul 17, 2013, 01:31 AM
Jul 2013

You knew that.

Luminous Animal

(27,310 posts)
13. No. You are worried that he might have an agenda.
Wed Jul 17, 2013, 02:05 AM
Jul 2013

Hunter S. Thomson had and agenda but he was a journalist.

Luminous Animal

(27,310 posts)
6. I'll believe the person who supports the social safety net, supports 100% public funding of election
Wed Jul 17, 2013, 01:16 AM
Jul 2013

raises money for progressive Democratic candidates, and believes the tyranny of corporations one of the greatest threats to democracy before I would give credence to any single thing that you could ever say.

struggle4progress

(118,350 posts)
8. You don't know squat about me, and you won't find a single post by me
Wed Jul 17, 2013, 01:25 AM
Jul 2013

opposing the social safety net, opposing 100% public funding of elections, advocating raising money for anyone other than progressive Democratic candidates, or cheering for corporate power

Luminous Animal

(27,310 posts)
12. And you won't find a single word from Greenwald opposing any of the above either.
Wed Jul 17, 2013, 01:54 AM
Jul 2013

In fact, you will find him supporting all, using his own name and not spreading lies, anonymously, of where YOU stand politically.

struggle4progress

(118,350 posts)
14. Actually, with respect to candidates, Greenwald typically adocates voting 3rd party or not voting:
Wed Jul 17, 2013, 02:20 AM
Jul 2013

In the preface to his 2006 book, he wrote "I never voted for George W. Bush — or for any of his political opponents"

And then there's this:

At a talk given the day after the 2010 election — one that was a disaster for Democrats — “progressive” writer and civil liberties lawyer Glenn Greenwald gave a talk at the University of Wisconsin, and expressed the hope that Democrats might suffer the same fate in 2012 ... Greenwald offered a few insights into his way of thinking ... He said Democrats have stigmatized the idea of supporting third parties or not voting at all ... Greenwald’s notion of third party voting .. offered the greatest window in what he’d like to see happen in American elections ... Here’s a transcript

... If .. at the end of the day .. you say .. I’m going to give you my support because .. the .. alternative is .. worse .. you're guaranteeing that you’ll always be ignored ... And the only way to break that is .. by abstaining or supporting a third party ...


Re-rise of the Naderites: Glenn Greenwald’s third party dreamin’ **UPDATE: on Libertarianism
Posted on April 22, 2011 by jreid
http://blog.reidreport.com/2011/04/re-rise-of-the-naderites-glenn-greenwalds-third-party-dreamin/

struggle4progress

(118,350 posts)
15. Since Greenwald supported the Citizens United decision, which sweepingly overturned existing
Wed Jul 17, 2013, 02:23 AM
Jul 2013

campaign finance restrictions, it's difficult to imagine him actually supporting 100% public fibnancing of elections: there's no way such a scheme could survive a challenge under the Citizens United decision

Luminous Animal

(27,310 posts)
17. I support it too. Because limiting corporate speech shuts down
Wed Jul 17, 2013, 03:28 AM
Jul 2013

Unions, Planned Parenthood, NOW, etc, All incorporated. That is why the ACLU, Greenwald and I advocate for political speech matching funds.

BlueCheese

(2,522 posts)
16. I think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone here...
Wed Jul 17, 2013, 03:18 AM
Jul 2013

... who opposed Greenwald when he was harshly criticizing George W. Bush. Greenwald more or less holds the same opinions now as he did then. Yet now some people's opinions on him have swung around completely. It's very strange.

And of course journalists can have opinions. Is what's written in the Nation journalism?

sigmasix

(794 posts)
19. Fox "news" is the epitome of partisan journalism
Wed Jul 17, 2013, 05:36 AM
Jul 2013

I know that cognitive dissonance is often used to distract Americans from the truth about our history and democracy- but this whole notion that we must embrace the fox "news" approach to "journalism" to protect our democracy is deadly to our democratic principles and the struggle to seperate the criminally wealthy from their positions of power over our "news" media and the manufacturing of "truth"-like information.
Why would any American patriot try to convince their fellow Americans that they are best informed about the world by utilizing the same destructive, anti-truth hyperbole as Teabaggers use to excuse their bigoted, racist ideology? Partisan "journalism" is a logical paradox; real journalism, like science, concentrates on uncovering the world as it really is and following the facts in an attempt to discover the truth, as opposed to partisan-approved and manufactured pre-conceived "truths" that lead to proving partisan-approved preconceived results. Partisan journalism begins with a preconceived belief and then looks for and creates proofs that support the preconceptions. Journalism follows the truth to the facts without relying on preconceived notions; in other words: real journalists follow the facts to the proof, where as partisan "journalists" start with a partisan "fact" and then attempt to find or manufacture proof of the fact. This is the opposite of a functioning democratic standard for the definition of news media.
Spending an entire OP on attempting to convince DUers that the fox "news" approach is in their best interest makes one wonder what the true intention is behind such a proposition.

 

FarCenter

(19,429 posts)
21. The definition of "journalists" matter if they have special legal privileges denied to others
Wed Jul 17, 2013, 12:50 PM
Jul 2013

What distinguishes journalists, who have special First Amendment privileges, from essayists generally?

or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press;

What immunities are conferred by the "of the press" clause, and who has them?
 

byeya

(2,842 posts)
22. Virtually all journalism is controlled by RW capitalists so we have advocacy journalism. We need
Wed Jul 17, 2013, 12:57 PM
Jul 2013

to try and balance the scales as much as possible.

As long ago as 1957, James Weschler, editor of the New York Post said: "The American press is overwhelmingly owned and operated by Republicans who fix the rules of US political debate. And I use the word 'fix' advisedly"

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»From Tom Paine to Glenn G...