Lol. Really, that’s funny. And you just left it like that, which is great.

From a memorable The Slot post published in December 1941:

Jesus fucking christ if you don’t know anything about how Intel reports are written, maybe look into it before writing this shit. Terms like “high confidence” and “moderate confidence” ARE ACTUAL TERMS WITH SPECIFIC MEANINGS. It doesn’t mean “maybe”. It is also a DECLASSIFIED report, which means you don’t get to see…

I wish Jez had used this space for something a bit more up-beat and, well, interesting. Also, despite the fact that this is a man who did horrible things, I’m not outraged about this situation. It seems simply to have been posted so that we could all throw insults and clever non sequiturs at him.

I am amongst the last to be critical of a writer here. On the one hand I have too much invested (much like with my dysfunctional family I don’t like airing grievances publicly) and on the other, not enough (it’s just a website/blog). But this article was extremely disappointing. I don’t expect nor want an echo chamber…

This article is pretty strange to read on Jezebel, honestly. The tone, the weird framing (the statement that the report just repeats allegations that the Democrats made during the campaign- What??), but particularly the underlying completely dishonest statement that the intelligence agencies have provided no evidence.…

Hannah really screwed up on this one (both headline and content).

The NYT has been fine, on these reports anyway. It was a particularly bad write-up for Hanna.

There’s been accusations about the headline as click bait but as far as I’m concerned it pretty much accurately conveyed the tone of the (misguided) article.

Well said. There’s really no excuse for someone who has decided to write an article on this not to have done some basic background work. I enjoy this site but things like this definitely help tip the scales towards “blog” rather than “journalism.” This piece in particular is bumping dangerously up against the fake…

Literally every person who was in the meeting with the officials who came out of it and saw the actual evidence said they believed it and said that they wished that they would declassify if precisely because of very articles like this. What are you even doing right now Hannah? I mean even Paul f***ing Ryan is on…

Exactly. I am so disturbed by how much people seem to emphasize the results more than the process. We know there were hacking attempts made in the DNC and in state voter registries, yet the response to this was what? Counting the votes again. Why would they even need to alter the votes if they were able to twiddle the…

It’s not the person who wrote the NYTimes article, it is Hannah who doesn’t understand the NYTimes reporting or what an intelligence analysis is. She’s using a follow up article about Russia’s response as the basis for this garbage. The NYTimes has a whole collection of articles on the intelligence report and this…

Nice to see someone else immediately made the link. The troublesome thing is that this site would publish something so utterly lacking in depth of analysis.

All I’m getting out of this is that whoever wrote the NYT piece doesn’t understand what an analysis is. The report’s declassified, of course it’s not going to have any of the actual intel that led them to their conclusion in it. And fuck whatever Putin’s mouthpieces are saying, they’re irrelevant because we know…

Glad you put this up. I was just about to post this Guardian article and suggest Jezebel try taking the time to learn about what is actually going on before publishing anymore of these embarrassing posts. And this one is extremely embarrassing- it’s like Hannah just skimmed one article (not even the main article on…

The last paragraph is spot on. Transparency is far more complex than good or bad. Also, there has been some evidence...but the fact that the intelligence agencies aren’t discussing how they received this evidence (and other evidence that hasn’t come to life) is what the critics will pounce on. This headline is…

As it’s been reported, the publicly released version of the Intelligence community’s report on the election doesn’t include any info that could jeopardize sources and cyber trails. But the top secret version has them.

Wow. This is a total garbage article. Jezebel really needs to rethink its political reporting- really, really not good. Let’s look at the NYTimes. Oh look. Literally the second bullet point front page main points of the article without even clicking on the article itself:

Yeah, I usually avoid ad hominem attacks in favor of critiques on the substance, but this article screams that it was written by someone with no expertise in intel, cyber security, or government in general.