Viva The New Journalism

Some asshole who works for an establishment newspaper with a right-wing editor pronounced the death of Establishment Journalism. To which I reply:

Viva the new journalism of Alan Rusbridger, dutiful smasher of computers on government orders and sender of David Miranda to Heathrow after dutifully so smashing.

Viva the new journalism of lying — repeatedly — about the size of your document trove to teach the rubes valuable lessons in proper whistleblowing.

Viva the new journalism of leaking 300 pages in four months from a trove that exceeds 60,000 documents.

Viva the new journalism that probably suppressed at least one story on government orders.

Viva the new journalism of putting 50k plus docs in the care of the New York Times since they had proven themselves so worthy with Cablegate.

Viva the new journalism that talks about the crucial role of the heroic journalist far far more than it talks about the secrets in his care.

Viva the new journalism that smacks down critics with childish insults and fallacies that would shame Donald Rumsfeld.

Viva the new journalism that worries over what mass surveillance means for Mark Zuckerberg.

Viva the new journalism that hoards leaks while it negotiates movie and television rights with Sony and HBO

Viva the New Journalism, same as the Old Journalism (watch from 4:30 below)


To the list of not-even-slightly-left things Greenwald — with his supernatural heat vampirism — has remade as radical, we must now add business partnerships with (sort of) libertarian billionaires. As everyone who reads me must know by now, Greenwald is leaving the Guardian to head up a new media venture funded by eBay founder Pierre Omidyar who, with a net worth of over $8.5 billion, is the 123rd richest person in the world. A noted philanthropist, Omidyar and his wife run The Omidyar Network, ‘an investment firm dedicated to harnessing the power of markets to create opportunity for people to improve their lives.’ (source)

So he’s one of the good billionaires.

The hoarding of wealth, like the hoarding of state secrets, is really not such a bad thing when it can be parlayed into more wealth and slightly better journalism, and if you think otherwise you must be jealous. Or addicted to failure. However you feel, trust that the oligarchs are quivering at this threat from one of their own making common cause with a radical gate crasher before whom the whole worldwide surveillance apparatus now trembles. No doubt Greenwald is shrewdly negotiating for full editorial autonomy from Mr. .00001%, so, as Arthur Silber remarked: ‘ look for all the stories about the corrupt, vicious ruling class by January at the latest.’


A Harbinger of Journalism Saved

A Heat Vampire in Search of a Movie Deal

Edward Snowden’s Incredible Mutating Document Trove

On The Pejorative Use of ‘Dumping’

My Reply to Glenn Greenwald’s Comments on ‘Take Your Drip and Stick It’

Fuck The Guardian: Take Your Drip and Stick It

Fuck The Guardian: Long Live The Independent?

Fuck The Guardian: Part 2

Fuck The Guardian: Part 1

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

111 Responses to Viva The New Journalism

  1. thedoctorisindahaus says:

    ¡Que viva NSA! May all the governments piercers be so wild eyed and brash.
    And may the new journalism’s vanity project flounder just like Eisenstein’s.

    Greenwald is anything but the only self serving, vainglorious media figure. It’s only because the money is still milking that he doesn’t seem senile.
    I feel oddly compelled to judge him on his own terms, as primarily a businessman.

    The greatest trick the extreme right, in Britain or here, ever pulled, was convincing the world that there was a moderate alternative to their buffoonish petulant grubbing.

    His trite tweets defending Snowden from now long forgotten tacky barbs about narcissism and vanity are just embarrassing for how they reveal gg’s projections of his own vulnerabilities of pride, onto Snowden’s risks of safety. It’s really a lot of tweeting about himself. Snowden doesn’t even exist as an independent voice. No wonder he’s so at ease speaking on Snowden’s behalf. Like another sock puppet.

    I think a miscalculation has been made by you, though. You think we need better theater and less cheese for the sycophancy to make sense. What, may I ask, ever sold better than cheese and cheesecake?

    As if it wasn’t cheesy enough, guardian/gg enablers have not only given them a pass, they’ve downright encouraged them to cheese up.

    • Tarzie says:

      I think a miscalculation has been made by you, though. You think we need better theater and less cheese for the sycophancy to make sense. What, may I ask, ever sold better than cheese and cheesecake?

      Entertain ME, dammit!!!

      • thedoctorisindahaus says:

        Haigh,sigh. Everybody’s in it for themselves.

        I really hope Snowden is a double agent after all and got a great deal out of this. Seeing as everyone else is getting rich or trying to. Porn stars should not go exploited by the producers. Alas.

  2. john says:

    viva the parapraxis…
    at the 25:06 mark where Glen refers to Snowden’s, “…reasonably well-paying job.”

  3. d.mantis says:

    @ 5:46 = “We haven’t heard any specific national security concerns with any of the material we have raised.”

    Double agent indeed.

  4. d.mantis says:

    “Its easier in the US because there is not prior restraint in the US.”

    Silly brits. We’re way more efficient cause we’ve simply institutionalized it.

    • Tarzie says:

      Exactly. And Janine Gibson seems to have acclimated quite well to the way we do things here, literally bragging about the care she takes to head off ‘national security concerns’ before these regular briefings with The White House and The DNI even take place. But we’re supposed to think this is so radically different from Bill Keller’s custodianship of Cablegate.

  5. Pingback: A Heat Vampire in Search of a Movie Deal | The Rancid Honeytrap

  6. Trish says:

    i read this on Glenn’s twitter and then saw your post

    Here’s a taste, from CBC, on how substantial the reaction to NSA docs has become in Canada after just one story…

    LOL do you think he is a tad sensitive that his greedy hoarding has only led to 198 pages being released, and thus felt the need to show how ONE story has had such a major impact. in reality, it makes hime even more of a twat, because the obvious response is well imagine what you could do if you released way, way more.

    I guess talking to lawyers, film makers, book editors, submitting drafts etc is really so much more important than getting out into the public domain asap the documents.

    Given the docs to NYT what a joke. But Glenn says he was not involved in that. Really??? I would think given he was Snowden’s contact, he could have insisted the Guardian partner with another paper, even multiple papers. he didn’t, why not? maybe, just maybe, because he benefits from it being this way.

    • Tarzie says:

      LOL do you think he is a tad sensitive that his greedy hoarding has only led to 198 pages being released

      He keeps the bar very low for himself. If there is any reaction anywhere to anything, he beats his chest about it. It’s embarrassing. Of course there are going to be ramifications from even his shitty little simulation of whistleblowing, but to what effect? Obviously for him and other people, it’s just the spectacle that matters. The illusion of causing a stir. That’s why they talk so little of what’s to be done. They don’t care.

      I guess talking to lawyers, film makers, book editors, submitting drafts etc is really so much more important than getting out into the public domain asap the documents.

      I saw him dressing down someone on The Guardian for suggesting maybe he should spend more time leaking and less time excoriating establishment journalism. ‘So I’m supposed to drop everything…etc’ began the typically gracious, self-effacing reply. It’s remarkable how insignificant he thinks the actual leaking is and also how dismissive he is of the idea that the surveilled people of the world might want to make a suggestion or two. ‘You’re not me and you’re not Snowden’ is really the stock answer. And, of course, the only reason why his workload is so high is because he refuses to share the documents with other journalists that will actually do anything with them. It just amazes me that people defend this shit. He’s every bit the gatekeeper Bill Keller was but Keller at least never pretended to be saving journalism, nor was he a ridiculous tantrum-throwing baby.

  7. Trish says:

    Did you see Glenn leaving Guardian. news leaked before he was ready to announce. He has been offered a dream job, but has not said what it is

    • AmishRakeFight says:

      The announcement hasn’t been formally made yet, but there’s quite a bit of information here:

      • Tarzie says:

        Thanks in advance for not making this thread all about Glenn’s new job that will change everything. I would not be at all surprised if this early announcement is an attempt to derail criticism and as a distancing maneuver against the Guardian. So let Buzzfeed take care of it and let the speculation about the 11 dimensional chess he is playing with the security state commence elsewheres. Around here, he’s still a columnist for the Guardian hoarding leaks and being a major dick about it. Found it interesting in the BF article that he and Poitras are even hoarding leaks away from the Guardian.

      • d.mantis says:

        Since it was made known that he was writting a book, I had assumed he was keeping some stuff all to himself. What I think is interesting is the mental gymnastics that he must go through to allow himself to operate as a complete and utter media whore while at the same time believing that he is some maverick journalist informing the people in the most self-sacrificing manner.

        The fact is that both the Guardian and GG make it ever so plainly clear that they are vetting already vetted documents (by Snowden as claimed) because they are oh so much more careful. They are not coming right out and saying it but they are atleast implying that Snowden was as indiscriminate as Manning (was portrayed). Gibson revels in the fact that they released 4 of the 41 slides for chirst’s sake!

        It absolutely fucking kills me Charlie didn’t ask the question “Thank you for explaining in such great depth how you have made every effort to make sure the authorities best interests are maintained. However, have you considered that the people’s best interest is diametrically opposed to you doing so?”

      • Tarzie says:

        If it kills you that Charlie didn’t ask that, you don’t know Charlie very well, but even he seemed a little taken aback at first when Gibson started talking so candidly about her regular conversations with ‘The Authorities.’

      • d.mantis says:

        No, I know Charlie all too well. I was more trying to imply exactly what you pointed out in the fact that even he was incredulous when they said that.

  8. ajrs says:

    “’s going to have sports and entertainment and features”
    WTF; that says it all.

    • Tarzie says:

      Ah, I dunno about that. It all depends on how good the journalism is. I am not going to speculate on this until it’s a done deal. At the moment I just see it as one more attempt to milk the Snowden cow while the leaks remain in storage. Fuck this guy.

      • ajrs says:

        ‘Move along folks, nothing to see here’. It’s merely the public debut of the technical evolution of the spectacle.

      • Jacques Use says:

        Well, I would say that the journalism probably will not matter.

        Aside from the preliminary shot across the bow, when they released the court order demonstrating the active harvesting of telco information, please name a single piece of news that they have put forth in the public domain that has not been utterly redacted to the point of meaninglessness?

        It is the document that matters. It gives concrete information upon which to make judgments. No matter how elegantly the interpretations are presented, it is impossible to have anything to act upon without facts, which expectedly are quite lacking.

        For myself the conclusions about the whole affair are quite forgone. Any subsequent “revelation” will present at best a marginal change in what we already knew.

        The movie deals and hoopla generated thereof merely confirm two basic realities:

        1) There is no messiah that will come to deliver us; if there is anything to be gained, it is to be earned ourselves.
        2) In the face of long odds and few clear personal gains the most common disposition is toward a state of whoredom.

        Meanwhile the onward march toward a more perfect totalitarianism will proceed unimpeded. For myself the most interesting implications are to be found in just how what is harvested is being utilized. I imagine they are striving toward the day where we are all clockwork oranges — effectively policed, complacent in our stations, and entirely removed from any sense of personal dignity.

  9. Hbris says:

    Regarding Greenwald’;s alleged new business venture: Quoting myself is probably somewhat of an indication of narcissistic tendencies, but nevertheless . . .
    The G’s (Greenwald and the Guardian) are drip feeding this because they are desperate to milk it for every penny it is worth, to establish both their online brands as fearless investigators

  10. Hubris says:

    TBH In light of Greenwalds new business venture, the Miranda arrest-theatre looks dodgier and dodgier

  11. diane says:

    As much as I’ve loved Glenn on Droning, I have to finally say UUUUUGHHHHHH ….and Omydar/eBay /etcetera, etcetera etcetera ……my, what an unbelievable stench.

    I imagine that Glenn is maybe sitting on data that Sly Con Valley’s Historic Newspaper (why is it never questioned that center of technology – i.e. ‘surveillance partners’ – does not, never has had, have a ‘Newspaper’ as predominant as the New York Times?), the San Jose Mercury News, has been infiltrated by DOD Gate Keepers, such as Herhold (I just lurve that name, as Sly Con Valley is absolutely one of the worst places to be stuck if one is female, of a feminine persuasion, or sympathetic with the concept of nurture (such as, perhaps the hispanic Mercury writer who literally gutted himself (Ramires, was his last name, as I recollect, and good luck ‘searching it’ it has been thoroughly wiped)) who likes to pretend he’s just a home grown mick local boy, who adores Bellarmine and really really cares about those homeless encamped along San Ho’s Guadalupe river trickle (when he’s not sticking his tongue up the ass of those who created the conditions for those humans to become ‘homeless’)), Mike Cassidy, and the two white boyo tech writers whose names currently escape me. …….

    Somehow, when all youth who don’t buy into The Cloud!!!!!!, and every other middle aged male in Sly Con Valley has lost their shirts ( and all of the previous middle aged females who wrote for the Murky have long since been Let Go!!!!!, ….. Herhold, Cassidy and those two ass licking, white boyo, tech writers Maintain!!!!! (for decades) licking Zuckerberg, et al, Cum, at the end of the day.

    Oh, and how could I forget Dan Gilmore [sp?], of previous Sly Con Valley, Murky Nooz fame , apparently connected at the hip with Glenn, and now at the UK Guardian, with his shirt fully intact.

    I contacted Ma$ter Gilmore in 2004, person to person, (he would recollect as to the quote: “which would you rather be, the spider and the fly” recording I informed him of) re something rather pertinent as to our financial Ma$ters of the univer$e.

    The fucker totally blew me off, and who knows who he forewarned of potential whistle blowing.

  12. ajrs says:

    Gotta love ‘honeytraps’, rancid or otherwise. 🙂

  13. Jay says:

    I don’t relish piling on here but that WaPo article just released is pretty nauseating. Reads like a government press release: “Snowden docs reveal NSA effectively spies on and kills AL QAEDA TERRORISTS.” We’re going to have a hell of a ‘debate’ with ‘revelations’ like those.

  14. goodpasture says:

    Reading JOSEPH ANTON is so revealing — these “he’s only out to make money” attacks from putative allies are nothing new.

    • Tarzie says:

      But “he’s only out to make money” isn’t the extent of the critique. And even where I concern myself with money, the issue is the hoarding of the leaks that leverages the deal-making, not the pursuit of reward by itself.

      Also, I am not even a ‘putative ally’ at this point so I have none of the obligations you seem to think that comes with, which, of course, includes the obligation to doltishly worship the heroes you worship. I think Greenwald is thoroughly toxic at this point, both to meaningful dissent from the surveillance state and to left analysis and resistance as a whole.

      I wish you guys, when you drop by here, would contend with what i’ve written, rather than demonstrating again and again how unutterably stupid, credulous and conformist most of Greenwald’s avid fans are.

      • goodpasture says:

        Of course it’s not the extent of the critique, I didn’t hint or imply that it was. I simply said that criticism (and it’s implications: “He did it for fame!”) is nothing new, especially from the left.

        It seems like your main criticism is with the process of journalism itself — if it takes a long time to understand and report on the documents, what else can the guy do? Especially if you reject his reasoning for withholding the document from other journalists, to prevent, in the eyes of the law, changing from a “reporter” hat to a “source” hat.

        That said, obviously I’m not “unutterably” stupid, since you were moved to utter.

      • Tarzie says:

        It seems like your main criticism is with the process of journalism itself — if it takes a long time to understand and report on the documents, what else can the guy do?

        Nope, you’re still firing blanks. Did you even read the fucking post? Lemme guess, you came here to read GG’s comments then jumped to the most recent post (without reading it) to sound off. Don’t worry, you’re not the first. You guys run on GG’s twitter farts so of course a blog post from a detractor looks positively mountainous. Since he is constantly talking out of his ass, why shouldn’t you?

        Maybe you’re not unutterably stupid — though I see nothing obvious about it — but commenting on shit you have not read based on GG’s typically self-serving mischaracterization of same certainly isn’t bright and it’s also really really arrogant. And the thing is, a writer knows when you’ve read him, and, clearly, you haven’t read me, at least with any comprehension. Which makes you look very foolish.

        If you want to actually engage, how about you start by reading the post at the top of this thread you jumped on for the sole purpose of insipidly reciting your hero’s self-serving talking points. It’s nice and short with hyperlinks to other useful information that would be helpful if you want to argue with what I have actually said instead of what Greenwald said I said or what you can skim from other members of the Greenwald Troll Society.

        God. You fanserfs. Horrible mixture of arrogance, ignorance and credulity. It’s repulsive.

      • goodpasture says:

        Oh, a Tarzie tongue-lashing! I’m honored. Man, this is just like I dreamed it would be…

        I understand your argument: Greenwald is a hypocrite, his reporting methods are compromised, and his radical pose masks a larger acquiescence.

        I simply think that many of your criticisms (Only 300 documents so far! They speak to the NSA before they publish!) aren’t valid as they’re part and parcel of the process of regular journalism. If you think that process is inherently corrupt, well…

      • Tarzie says:

        You’re cherry picking various criticisms, mischaracterizing them and then attempting to refute them. You’re a cardboard cutout Glennbot. Feeling that a tongue-lashing attests to something other than what dime-a-dozen little trifle you are is also part of the template.

        I wish one of you would surprise me just once, by arguing with what I’ve said as a whole and doing so in good faith. You’re incapable.

      • goodpasture says:

        I find some of your criticism valid, I find some silly. I pointed out the criticism I disagree with and explained why. If that makes me a cherry-picker, then hand me a basket.

      • Tarzie says:

        It makes you a cherry picker because you are not placing your criticism in the larger framework. For instance, you argue that, of course, these things take a long time, that’s journalism! Glenn is one man!

        But part of the problem is, it’s only Glenn, which, unlike you, I see as something more mutable than gravity.

      • goodpasture says:

        But it’s not only Glenn, is it?

      • Tarzie says:

        Please see ‘Edward Snowden’s Incredible Mutating Document Trove’ for info on the scale of the document trove and the person power dedicated to it.

        Or you could just fuck off along home.

  15. Trish says:


    You should really read the posts but to address your point. Glenn said he could not give reporters documents because he then became a source and that poses greater legal danger. Assuming that is true, what Glenn has never explained is why he did not get the guardian to give the documents to other reporters same as what they did with NYT. Glenn said Guardian as a publsiher had better protection and thus able to give documents to NYT. So why stop there? Why not get them out to more reporters etc.

    As for his new venture, how long before it is up, and how many more docs will be delayed,so they can be reported there, and grab huge attention for new venture?

    As for books and movies. both these vehicles take time. how much time is Glenn devoting to them? given that he is one of a few that has the documents how much of the time he is currently devoting to his future book etc, is reducing even more the documents that should be getting out into the media, now.

    Yes, Glenn is hoarding. What the Guardian did with NYT shows Glenn had another way to get more documents out, without opening himself to legal challenges. Why didn’t he do that?

    • Tarzie says:

      Thank you. I couldn’t be bothered to paraphrase myself for one more lazy nitwit.

    • AmishRakeFight says:

      This one’s a total waste of time. If he thinks the argument here boils down to “Greenwald is a hypocrite, his reporting methods are compromised, and his radical pose masks a larger acquiescence,” then he clearly hasn’t read (or if so, hasn’t understood) what has been written and discussed here.

    • goodpasture says:

      Why didn’t the New York Times share the Pentagon Papers? No media outlet would share its scoops unless it was forced. The Guardian shared the documents with the New York Times after the UK political atmosphere turned toxic. I can see the argument for pre-emptively sharing, but to characterize that behavior as “hoarding” is incorrect.

      The book and notional movie should be judged on their merits, not their imagined drawbacks.

      • Tarzie says:

        You argue for a monopoly on intellectual property purely by assertion. The priority you dolts give to commercial interests and Glenn’s ambition vs informing the world about the NSA’s crimes against everyone on earth is truly a marvel. If this is how journalism MUST act than journalism is the wrong medium for whistleblowing.

        Now run along, you conformist idiot, and dumb down someone else’s blog.

      • goodpasture says:

        I’m not saying it’s correct, I’m saying you shouldn’t hold a journalist and media outlet to a non-existent standard, then criticize them for failing to meet that standard.

      • Tarzie says:

        Oh yes but I can. No one forces anyone to adhere to a ‘standard.’

        Now please stop. Your argument is basically, this is just the way things are, which is a shit argument no matter how you slice it.

      • goodpasture says:

        My argument is that some of your criticisms of the Guardian and Greenwald are criticisms of traditional journalistic practices.

      • Tarzie says:

        Yes, I am aware of that.

        And I am saying there are all kind of ways this could have played out where journalistic practices would not have been so at odds with getting out information, which for anyone who is not a complete idiot, is obviously the most important thing.

        I have really resisted the urge to reward your lazy non-engagement with what I have actually written by paraphrasing but in the interest of getting you to be less of a repetitive dolt I am going to give the minimal broad strokes of my overall complaint.

        1. It was a bad idea for Snowden to hand off his leaks to such a small number of journalists

        2. It would have been better if Snowden had, in accordance with his own stated wishes, handed off the leaks to journalists all over the world.

        3. Since Snowden is no longer able to distribute the leaks widely, Greenwald and co should do it themselves. (and no I don’t give a fuck if this is against standard practice, which is simply an argument for the primacy of their commercial interests)

        4. In addition to the monopoly on leaks being objectionable in itself, Greenwald and his colleagues are exceptionally poor custodians of the leaks, for reasons I have made plain in a number of posts.

        For more, READ MY FUCKING POSTS.

        Now I am going to ignore you, and encourage others to do likewise, because you are a borderline troll at this point.

      • goodpasture says:

        I think criticisms #1 and #2 are completely valid; I don’t agree with #4, though I think you’ve made substantial points.

        As for #3, I simply don’t think following traditional practices is inherently corrupt.

  16. Trish says:

    Wow you really seem determined to ignore the facts. let’s Leave aside the issue whether it is acceptable for a journalist to hoard tens of thousands of documents. because according to you “that is what they do”.

    That has never been Glenn’s reason. His reason is i would love to share, but I can’t because of legal issues. So when the Guardian handed the documents over to NYT, Glenn’s reasons for hoarding no longer held water.

    If Glenn’s real reason for hoarding is as you suggest “that what journalist do. Hold onto their source and protect their commercial interest”. Then why doesn’t Glenn cop to that? i know why, because if he did, then even you while pretending here that is his reason, would have a hard time defending it if he actually copped to it.

    • goodpasture says:

      I said it wasn’t standard for media outlets to share their scoops. Greenwald and Poitras as individuals have shared documents widely.

      Also, Greenwald didn’t hand over documents to the NY Times, the Guardian did. I think this is an important distinction.

    • The only source for the idea that there’s a legal distinction between “source” and “journalist” is Glenn himself, on a handful of vague comments. He has not explained what that legal distinction is, what laws explicate it, or wherein it has been applied before, and I have seen literally no one else agree that it exists or explain where it exists. Which is not to say that it doesn’t, but, well…

      (Even if it does, of course, tough shit.)

  17. Trish says:


    You seem to willingly miss the point. Yes, the Guardian handed over the documents to NYT. And therefore it stands to reason that Glenn could have asked them to hand over documents to other new outlets. he didn’t? Why not?

    Just because other journalist hoard for fame and material gain, does that then make it okay for Glenn? AS Tarzie points out if that is the “standard” then the media is not the place for whistleblowers, as it is just another set of gatekeepers.

    • goodpasture says:

      Because until the UK government ordered their hard drives smashed, they obviously didn’t think they had to.

      Arguing that Greenwald, et al, should have pre-emptively bypassed their standard practices is a criticism I don’t think makes a lot of sense.

      And implying that a person acts in a certain way for fame and money is the exact criticism leveled against Salman Rushdie for THE SATANTIC VERSES, which is the point I originally tried to make.

  18. AmishRakeFight says:

    God dammit, everyone. Please stop engaging with this asshole. He clearly isn’t interested in listening and arguing in good faith and he also obviously hasn’t read up on the the last several posts and topics discussed here. And even when it’s been distilled down and summarized briefly for him, he still can’t form a coherent, substantive response.

    • Tarzie says:

      Yeah, I regret having sent mixed messages, saying don’t engage and then engaging myself. Goodpasture is a classic Glennbot troll, and as tempting as it may be to feed it, we should probably all resist the urge at this point.

  19. diane says:

    ….. oh my, the mind wanders ……all those Thought Leaders!!!!and their political benefactors in the historically DOD/CIA funded California Valley of Silicon – where Omidyar – made billions by greazing whatever wheels he was able to, and making an obscene fortune off of trades that used to be conducted offline, with no 10% middle rentier entities (don’t forget PayPal’s cut, and convenient accessing of ones financial data for further techno extortion) necessary (before millions in the U$ were made permanently transient wanderers, unable to set down roots anywhere without the threat of homelessness, despite at one time (not so long ago at all) being considered honest, ‘law abiding persons’ who paid their bills on time).

    Would love to be a fly on the conversations Omidyar’s been having, in the last few days, with those Empire of California Rulerz, whose company he has surely ‘snuggled’ with, …. such as: eBay Meg Whitman and Creepy Hubby, Rutherford; ….$enator DIFI/BLUM; ….. Jerry the Jesuit HAWK Brown; ….. …..Brin/Page/Schmidt; …….Thiel; …. Andreessen; ….. Zuckerfuck; ….Seattle Cuzinz , Billy Gates & Bezos the AmazonianBottle Fly;… al . (perhaps even, in passing, Newly Annointed University of C alifornia ‘SYS STEM’ CZAR, Janet ‘Homeland Security’ Napolitano;….all those who willfully – and to ob$cene profit – partnered in the utter violation of human dignity, a right to privacy¸and far, far worse. …….

    Not to worry, I’m sure Bruce Schneier will save us (by making suggestions thoroughly impractical and unaffordable to 99.9999999999999999% percent of the populace who he could clearly give a rat’s ass about if they don’t understand his coding acronyms), …… NOT. ….. I’ll bet my life the only reason Schneirer’s upset (if in fact he really is?) is that he wasn’t included in the game as much as he thinks he should have been.

    • diane says:

      (ahhh welll, a bit buzzed I am, but can one really blame for my repeatedly using the genitive/possessive case for our Thought Leaders!!!! even when, at first glance, it looks grammatically incorrect?)

    • Tarzie says:

      I love your comments. I just wish I understood them a little better.

      it does seem really weird that of all the moguls to bed down with, the one Greenwald beds down with is a big Silicon Valley mogul, when he’s sitting on a trove of secrets that no doubt casts that crowd in the poorest of lights. I mean Omidyar is literally one degree separated from Palantir.

      It just gets weirder and weirder. There isn’t a single aspect of this whole spectacle that doesn’t reek of bullshit and bad faith.

  20. Trish says:


    Very intriguing. Wish you could claify, or at least give clearer hints.

    • diane says:

      I’m assuming you’re referring to my comment regarding my person to person conversation with Gilmore? (If not, the rest of what I’ve written is ‘conjecture’ (from my ‘subjective’ viewpoint it only stands to reason ….. with the best of impartial logicians (to my mind)) from having lived and worked in Sly Con Valley way too long, along with paying close attention to demographics, and other mundane ‘small things in life’ in what I consider DC’s Shadow Government (at the very least, one of the primary shadow governments)), if so I’m very sorry I can’t share much, I have no shield of protection , everyone I care about is now poverty ridden -therefore at threat – and certainly would not be able to provide back up for me ( a feature, not a bug), and I would never put them in the position to feel the need to at this point (Oh, and thinking on it: The Mother Fuckining Nerve Of Schneier, who has aided and abetted all that suddenly necessary to live one’s life coding (???????????????) that the majority cannot be expected to even understand ( let alone be able to protect themselves with it?????) Calling On all WhistleBlowers, Has He Done Anything For Bradley Manning Lately?????????).

      I will say this, about my Gilmore conversation, I shared something quite verifiable with him about an entity historically purported to be a benevolent watch dog over Corporate Thievery …and the FUCKER BLEW ME OFF. …….He wouldn’t have even put himself at much risk in commenting on it, since it was not even something illegal that had been done, it was just one of those stunningly blatant acknowledgements of corruption that happen daily at entities which 99.9999999% of the populace don’t even know exist.

      Fuck Dan Gilmore and the Bulk of the White Boy$Z (including MZ Marshman (the Editoressa of Editorials and Letters, and certainly all the other VIPS and Majority HedgeFund Owners), At The San Ho Murky Nooz.

      • diane says:

        Oh … and that SLEAZEBAG DEAN SINGLETON (now a muckety at AP (Associated Press) last I read), along with his predecessors who share the obscene responsibility (along with the Los Angeles Times, WAPO/NYT etcetera, etcetera, etcetera ……………….. for Gary Webb’s two bullets to the head misery and human abandonment………. such a foul stench fills the air……… in Sly Con Valley and the Empire of Cali, in general ……….

      • Trish says:

        Well i think we agree the media are either whores, dumb, or all the above. I read about gary webb long time ago. Not sure what involvement the reporters you name had, but truth is most do not want to touch “hot” stories.

        As for the institutions etc meant to watch the foxes most were co opted long ago, assuming they ever really worked on the first place and were not just a prop

  21. Romancing the Loan says:

    New article in the Times today with an interview “this month” w/Snowden. Seems like a rehash to keep the story alive/add buzz for GG’s new media company, but this little bit was interesting:

    “He said that he handed over the documents to [greenwald and poitras] because he wanted his own bias “divorced from the decision-making of publication,” and that “technical solutions were in place to ensure the work of the journalists couldn’t be interfered with.”

    His own bias? I wonder what he means there. I also notice that part’s not in quotes.

    • d.mantis says:

      The really disturbing part is this:
      “Mr. Snowden said he gave all of the classified documents he had obtained to journalists he met in Hong Kong, before flying to Moscow, and did not keep any copies for himself. He did not take the files to Russia “because it wouldn’t serve the public interest,” he said.”

      So not only did this guy give the document trove to a money-grubbing, hypocrite media whore, he handed over SOLE posession to said whore. Makes me feel so good that those serving the public interest can also work so damn hard with authorities to tell us just enough to keep the money rolling in.

  22. Pingback: Confronting Edward Snowden’s Remarks on Bradley Manning | The Rancid Honeytrap

  23. Tarzie says:

    Friendly suggestion that ‘sell-out’ and ‘opportunist’ and ‘profiteer’ are much better words for these people than whore. Sex workers provide a perfectly legitimate service in exchange for money and no doubt all of them do it with a lot less bullshit and for far less compensation than riff-raff like Glenn and his ilk.

  24. adam says:

    Hi Tarzie, I have not commented until now but have enjoyed reading your posts for a while. I identify with the skepticism about Greenwald partnering with a Silicon Valley billionaire to reveal…what, and about whom now, I’m not sure, but I am wondering whether you (and other readers) see anything – however small – in the Greenwald/Omidyar partnership about which to be optimistic? I hope the question has not been answered in the comments somewhere.

    • Tarzie says:

      No, I don’t. First of all, I am not getting on this bandwagon that is making superstar Journalism the engine of social change. So even if it results in some good journalism, I don’t think it matter all that much. Second, I don’t think Silicon Valley billionaires can ever be the catalysts of speaking truth to power. They are power.

    • Tarzie says:

      I am actually writing a post today, but it’s going to stay fairly narrowly focused.

      • adam says:

        I imagine you have no plans to write anything for an establishment outlet or even a non-establishment outlet with a relatively wide readership, but I feel it’s a shame for your necessary and very well-argued criticisms of Greenwald not to be heard by as many people as possible. You likely know where to look better than I, but I have trouble finding criticism of Greenwald out there that isn’t to the right of him.

        I started reading him in 2008 when he was still at Salon and his was one of the few blogs I checked every day. I was a huge fan of his, but reading your blog has made me view him very differently. I still don’t necessarily believe he’s evil or consciously trying to undermine progressive politics, but he has been able to brilliantly negotiate establishment wealth and power to position himself as the next left superstar, and it appears to have gone to his head in ways that have more serious implications than how he treats people on Twitter. More people need to know about what his document hoarding and he and his fellow Gatekeepers’ masquerading as some kind of revolutionary alternative to establishment journalism means. I think you are right in that they pose a very real danger to the left. In any case, keep up the good work; I look forward to the next post.

      • Tarzie says:

        No mainstream outlet would ever have me, even if I wanted it.

  25. CumulativeTrauma says:

    I think Omidyar is gunning for poiltical office – somewhere. His residence seems to be in Hawaii but owning property in Califormia or just moving to California may put him over the residence requirement if he wants to run for CA-Gov. Or maybe nobody will give a shit about that anyway.

    He’ll have the anti-security “cred” of hiring Greenwald for his media mogul “news” service, his own bankroll, and he can get a lot of shit done for the Silicon Valley execs working from Sacramento.

    Maybe to this guy 250$ million is chump change, but it’s a lot of work to do it as a hobby, I suspect ulterior motives. Plus he may have friends in D.C. who are looking at this “relationship” with approval.

    • diane says:

      Being of [Trojan Horse] Iranian descent, we can all bet that he has been thoroughly vetted and approved by the DOD (and DIFIBLUM, Boxer, et al (and Bipartisan!!!!!!) in the Cali Empire) , and well, …, as Tarzie noted:

      It just gets weirder and weirder. There isn’t a single aspect of this whole spectacle that doesn’t reek of bullshit and bad faith.

      • CumulativeTrauma says:

        Yes, and maybe sights set higher than Governor, is Feinstein dead yet, maybe he’s looking at U.S. Senator. And by dead I don’t mean the walking dead, like she is currently.

        If he runs for office, I predict another merry-go-round of “But he’s not like Obama!” “It’ll be different this time!” “Fooled me once – fool me again!” “The NSA will be shut down the day after he is elected!”

        What could possibly go wrong.

      • CumulativeTrauma says:

        I think this “working relationship” between Greenwald and Omidyar proves that GG is operating purely selfishly with no thought to Snowden, “debates,” outcomes, or desire to take down NSA. A billionaire contacts you and wants you to run his media service? That wouldn’t pass the sniff test for a fucking millisecond with anybody who had the wherewithal to look past the payola.

      • diane says:

        I doubt he’ll “run for office” , why should he, when he can afford anything he wants, in the privacy of his own, unintruded upon, Rare Earth paradise, and still call the shots?

        Does anyone see Little Billy, the ex Congressional Page Boy, Sociopath, Gates, and his seedy slimy mentor Gramps, Buffet; [Gigantic Pumpkin Head] CIA Fan boy, Samurai Yachts Man Island Ruler Ellison; [what to call this utterly despicable, inhuman triangle of Monsters, whose dicks Al ‘DARPA’ GORE has been sucking and promoting for decades?] Brin/Page/Schmidt; I shot a wild Pig with an assault weapon creepy clown Zucker Fuck; Thoroughly Creepy, Point Headed Andreessen; One Honorary, One Original Afrikaners, Operation Paper Clipped, Thiel and creepy teethed Elon [Rancid] Musk [Smell] running for office …… etcetera, etcetera , etcetera (they appear to be exponentially multiplying as we post)? ………….

        One starts to really feel sorry for caucasian males, in terms of looking at them with such distrust after witnessing what the above monsters all have most obviously (to the image loving eye) in common….

        Peel back the flesh though …..and certainly look at Obomster and his hideous Wifey …….things are a bit more complicated than that ….. sighhhhhh …………………

  26. Pingback: A Harbinger of Journalism Saved | The Rancid Honeytrap

  27. Pingback: Another Snowden News Story. Another Lesson in Proper Whistleblowing. | The Rancid Honeytrap

  28. Pingback: Glenn Greenwald Still Covering for Omidyar on PayPal | The Rancid Honeytrap

  29. Pingback: Fuck These Google Guys | The Rancid Honeytrap

  30. Pingback: Dr. Rosen and The Snowden Effect | The Rancid Honeytrap

  31. Pingback: For Laughs: Omidyar Media Advisor Jay Rosen in His Own Words | The Rancid Honeytrap

  32. Pingback: No, Pierre Omidyar Does Not Want To Topple The Government | The Rancid Honeytrap

  33. Pingback: In Conclusion | The Rancid Honeytrap

  34. Pingback: I Read the New York Magazine Omidyar Article So You Don’t Have To | The Rancid Honeytrap

  35. Pingback: Blog Postmortem: learning from the billionaire journalism model | Nathan L. Fuller

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s