Greenwald Rapidly Destroying His Credibility

Glenn Greenwald formerly of The Guardian and The Intercept, the latter of which he helped to found in the aftermath of the Edward Snowden revelations – has gone out on his own. One of the lone voices within anti-Establishment (Left-wing) journalism, he has made enemies by questioning the Russiagate narrative and has at times questioned some of the Left's narratives surrounding Donald Trump.

He is not a fan of Trump as he has repeatedly made clear. This also comes out in his writings. He's not a Trumpite, conservative or Right-wing in any way. But at the same time his journalistic integrity has required him to speak truth to power – to political power and the mainstream media that often serves as guardian for the Establishment.

Because of this, some elements have turned against him. His defense of Julian Assange, his questioning of the Russiagate story, his criticism of Biden (and his son) and his failure to toe the DNC line have made him a lot of enemies. A sodomite, he's about as Left-wing Libertarian as you can get. The confusion comes with the reality that a lot of the media options that are out there which are considered or perceived as 'Left' really aren't. The Establishment media seems to be Left-leaning on certain points of social policy and morality but it's far to the Right when it comes to Wall Street, the military and US policy abroad. On the international spectrum American and British mainstream outlets are Centre-Right or perhaps (by a stretch) Centre-Left. They are a far cry from being 'Far Left' as is claimed by the FOX crowd and the Trumpite sphere.

Other alternative outlets are definitely Left-wing but in many cases they're more activist than journalistic and thus they come into conflict with the likes of Greenwald who has insisted on truth-telling even if it means stepping on everyone's toes. I must admit to having read a lot of his work and though (for obvious reasons) I cannot praise his person, I nevertheless have retained a level of respect for him. He is one of the few journalists out there that is committed to his craft.

And thus I have been increasingly disconcerted to see him appearing on outlets such as FOX. I understand that he's been blacklisted (or nearly so) by many of the Establishment mainstream outlets. FOX is willing to give him voice because at certain points he echoes their line. He's critical of the very corrupt DNC, the Anti-Russia campaign, the Obama Administration, and the Left's increasingly attacks on free speech. This itself is somewhat bizarre as historically it has been the Right that was opposed to free speech and for censorship, but the Left (in reality the Pseudo-Left) has fallen into various Identity Politics traps and the like and as such has lost its way in terms of liberal principles. Once again, far from drifting to the Left, the so-called Left is found to be drifting in terms of some of its principles to the Right. It's a historical pattern we've seen before, especially when Left-wing movements fall prey to capitalist and nationalist impulses as is the case in US society.

Greenwald is right to criticise these things and on a certain level there is a degree of satisfaction to be found in Trump's upsetting of the Establishment order. This 'upsetting' is (taken alone) quite satisfying and even entertaining at times. However, taken within a larger context, there's nothing to celebrate and Trumpism remains a real danger – even after his presidency has ended.

FOX is happy to have him on. Greenwald is articulate, impassioned, and quite competent – a rare thing in the FOX world. Also, he's a known Leftist and thus his appearance on the network and his criticism of the DNC grants both FOX and the Republican Party a degree of credibility. In other words they're using him. He probably knows this and yet as one cast adrift, having broken his ties with The Intercept, he seems eager for attention (and perhaps a paycheck).

I was glad to see him leave The Intercept. The site has been in a serious state of decline. No longer oppositional, the bulk of its work was in line with the DNC campaign against Trump. Granted it was more aligned with Sanders/Ocasio-Cortez wing of the party but as other commentators have repeatedly demonstrated these figures are in reality pseudo-leftists whose thinking still rests well within the mainstream consensus. They may be on its fringe but they're still within its ranks and as such represent no serious threat to the system. The Intercept has become a mouthpiece for this kind of thinking and the journalism it produces.

Greenwald was one of the few voices that didn't fit in anymore. In just a few short years the online magazine had shifted gears leaving one of its flagship journalists adrift and ultimately alienated.

But for Greenwald to appear on the likes of Laura Ingraham and Tucker Carlson? I cannot understand this. The thing is the Right is not interested in him and the Left will only begin to turn away from him and doubt his credibility, veracity and yes, integrity by appearing on such shows.

It's a big mistake. Ingraham and Carlson are not serious news reporters or journalists. They're Right-wing activists and they're using him. And either he is their willing agent or he's demonstrating a lack of discernment. Either way it doesn't reflect well on Greenwald.

I'm sorry to say that even oppositional journalist figures like Aaron Maté and Max Blumenthal have also appeared on FOX, but Greenwald has outdone them many times over. I appreciate his comments regarding the danger of an echo chamber and I would likewise criticise independent journalists who appear on the likes of Rachel Maddow – which given her increasing Establishment-DNC militancy seems unlikely.

I guess at the end of the day are you willing to go it alone if that's what it takes to maintain your integrity?

It's hard to imagine someone like Seymour Hersh appearing on FOX and though Greenwald, Maté, and Blumenthal are worthy of respect, Hersh is the one who has been willing to burn bridges and go it alone – come what may. And I say that as one who does not always agree with Hersh. I think he's gotten some stories wrong or contextualised them incorrectly. But I respect him and I'll always listen. I hope that holds true for Greenwald.*

I hope the substantial pay that he received from Omidyar's Intercept hasn't ruined him. I don't think so but the more he appears on the likes of Ingraham and Carlson – I worry.

----

*This is not to say that Hersh hasn't developed his own problems. As one effectively blacklisted after questioning the bin Laden death narrative, he must have grown desperate for some publicity. I was most disheartened to see him appear on Infowars – a bad move that only vindicated his detractors and their claims that 'Hersh has lost it'. He hasn't, but it wasn't a wise move and as his career nears its end I fear it will haunt his legacy.