Why does this simple assembly program work in AT&T syntax but not Intel syntax?

What's wrong with this code (Running on x86_64 Linux)?

.intel_syntax
.text
.globl _start

_start:
    mov rax, 1
    mov rdi, 1
    mov rsi, msg
    mov rdx, 14
    syscall

    mov rax, 60
    mov rdi, 0
    syscall

.data
msg:
    .ascii "Hello, world!\n"

When I run it:

$ clang -o hello_intel hello_intel.s  -nostdlib  && ./hello_intel

No output. Let's strace it:

$ strace ./hello_intel
execve("./hello_intel", ["./hello_intel"], [/* 96 vars */]) = 0
write(1, 0x77202c6f6c6c6548, 14)        = -1 EFAULT (Bad address)
exit(0)                                 = ?
+++ exited with 0 +++

It's dereferencing msg instead of using its location. Why?

If I use AT&T syntax instead...

.text
.globl _start

_start:
    mov $1, %rax
    mov $1, %rdi
    mov $msg, %rsi
    mov $14, %rdx
    syscall

    mov $60, %rax
    mov $0, %rdi
    syscall

.data
msg:
    .ascii "Hello, world!\n"

...it works fine:

$ clang -o hello_att hello_att.s  -nostdlib && ./hello_att
Hello, world!

What's the difference between these two?

Here's the working one:

$ objdump -d hello_att -s -M intel

hello_att:     file format elf64-x86-64

Contents of section .text:
 4000e8 48c7c001 00000048 c7c70100 000048c7  H......H......H.
 4000f8 c6160160 0048c7c2 0e000000 0f0548c7  ...`.H........H.
 400108 c03c0000 0048c7c7 00000000 0f05      .<...H........  
Contents of section .data:
 600116 48656c6c 6f2c2077 6f726c64 210a      Hello, world!.  

Disassembly of section .text:

00000000004000e8 <_start>:
  4000e8:   48 c7 c0 01 00 00 00    mov    rax,0x1
  4000ef:   48 c7 c7 01 00 00 00    mov    rdi,0x1
  4000f6:   48 c7 c6 16 01 60 00    mov    rsi,0x600116
  4000fd:   48 c7 c2 0e 00 00 00    mov    rdx,0xe
  400104:   0f 05                   syscall 
  400106:   48 c7 c0 3c 00 00 00    mov    rax,0x3c
  40010d:   48 c7 c7 00 00 00 00    mov    rdi,0x0
  400114:   0f 05                   syscall 

And here's the broken one:

$ objdump -d hello_intel -s -M intel

hello_intel:     file format elf64-x86-64

Contents of section .text:
 4000e8 48c7c001 00000048 c7c70100 0000488b  H......H......H.
 4000f8 34251701 600048c7 c20e0000 000f0548  4%..`.H........H
 400108 c7c03c00 000048c7 c7000000 000f05    ..<...H........ 
Contents of section .data:
 600117 48656c6c 6f2c2077 6f726c64 210a      Hello, world!.  

Disassembly of section .text:

00000000004000e8 <_start>:
  4000e8:   48 c7 c0 01 00 00 00    mov    rax,0x1
  4000ef:   48 c7 c7 01 00 00 00    mov    rdi,0x1
  4000f6:   48 8b 34 25 17 01 60    mov    rsi,QWORD PTR ds:0x600117
  4000fd:   00 
  4000fe:   48 c7 c2 0e 00 00 00    mov    rdx,0xe
  400105:   0f 05                   syscall 
  400107:   48 c7 c0 3c 00 00 00    mov    rax,0x3c
  40010e:   48 c7 c7 00 00 00 00    mov    rdi,0x0
  400115:   0f 05                   syscall 

So the important difference here is 0x600116 vs QWORD PTR ds:0x600117, which indeed looks like the difference between a pointer and dereferencing a pointer.

So how do you not dereference the pointer in the Intel syntax code?