Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Twitter labels NPR's account as 'state-affiliated media', which is untrue

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–55 of 55 posts

Re: Twitter labels NPR's account as 'state-affiliated media', which is untrue

#51

Post by vuln »

oska wrote: post #47
dingosity wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It turns out that many people leave the intelligence community each year. Many of them move on to other jobs (i.e. - they don't retire, they change jobs.) Some of these jobs are at NPR. What's your point?

This is highly disingenuous. Former employees of intelligence agencies have no place in employed, paid roles in corporate or state media, because the possibility that they are still working to advance the agencies propaganda or protect their past actions and present causes is way too high. If they like, they can set up as an independent journalist or commentator, as Ray McGovern has done, where they are invited on as…

Thanks. You articulated this better than I could.

Re: Twitter labels NPR's account as 'state-affiliated media', which is untrue

#52

Post by vannevar »

revelio wrote: post #49
vannevar wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By this same logic, all television networks are "state-affiliated media", because they all depend on local stations that hold federally-granted broadcast licenses. So add Fox Broadcasting, NBC, CBS, etc., etc. to your list.

Broadcast licensing isn't the same thing as direct subsidization, though.

Agreed. Licensing is much more powerful leverage, because there's no alternative. At least PBS stations can appeal to private sources for funding. Licensing power is exclusive to the government.

Re: Twitter labels NPR's account as 'state-affiliated media', which is untrue

#53

Post by vuln »

dingosity wrote: post #38
vuln wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The federal government does not exercise any editorial control over NPR other than by the mechanisms that apply to Fox, CNN, Newsmax, or any other "private" media organization. So NPR hires former IC members and then utilizes them to downplay or hype a story? I mean “give an analysis”…

It turns out that many people leave the intelligence community each year. Many of them move on to other jobs (i.e. - they don't retire, they change jobs.) Some of these jobs are at NPR. What's your point?

Perhaps you should read this article that highlights MSNBC and the lies their paid IC folks spewed relentlessly. Not only were they lying, countless times to push a narrtive MSNBC NEVER corrected any of their “mistakes” oh right “that’s just their opinion, it doesn’t matter if they were previously a spy, they don’t do that anymore”

https://www.racket.news/p/msnbc-sucks

Re: Twitter labels NPR's account as 'state-affiliated media', which is untrue

#54

Post by revelio »

vannevar wrote: post #52
revelio wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Broadcast licensing isn't the same thing as direct subsidization, though.

Agreed. Licensing is much more powerful leverage, because there's no alternative. At least PBS stations can appeal to private sources for funding. Licensing power is exclusive to the government.

But in practice (in the USA) broadcast licenses are just a way to manage spectrum and don't get revoked for political reasons. Funding can go up or down depending in order to condition behavior.

Re: Twitter labels NPR's account as 'state-affiliated media', which is untrue

#55

Post by Rapzid »

vuln wrote: post #45
dingosity wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It turns out that many people leave the intelligence community each year. Many of them move on to other jobs (i.e. - they don't retire, they change jobs.) Some of these jobs are at NPR. What's your point?

Some of those jobs are at NPR and other News Networks. Some of those jobs are at all the social networks… Some of those are at think tanks… It seems like where ever there is a choke point to information you’ll find a bunch of IC members. It’s just a coincidence, I’m sure.

Industries interested in intelligence have a high concerntration of former IC members?

Wow, so slueth. Such conspire.

Post reply on HN