131–140 of 1001 posts
And whether it's unpopular or not, CPB gets federal and state grants for part of their operating budgets . Technically state funded or affiliated in the same way auto makers get government contracts.
I don't know why they are mad about the designation. Whether it implies bias or not, it's true they get state funds, ergo they are state funded media.
I think after COVID and all the revelations since then it is pretty clear that funding aside, every big media outlet bends over to their own government when they are being asked to push a certain narrative to the population in order to make us belief or behave in certain ways. COVID made this extremely blatantly obvious but it was already apparent before COVID. For instance, when the US and its allies wanted to invad…
> It argues that the mass communication media of the U.S. "are effective and powerful ideological institutions that carry out a system-supportive propaganda function, by reliance on market forces, internalized assumptions, and self-censorship, and without overt coercion", by means of the propaganda model of communication.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It disregards editorial control, which was part of how Twitter used to decide this. https://web.archive.org/web/20230404115255/https:/help.twitt... "State-financed media organizations with editorial independence, like the BBC in the UK or NPR in the US for example, are not defined as state-affiliated media for the purposes of this policy."
Whether CBC is actually neutral and non-partisan is something of a perennial political issue in Canada. I personally would say it is. A lot of the country disagrees. The opposition party wishes to cancel it. Opinion polls indicate the public believes it to be the most partisan major broadcaster in Canada. Twitter will be wading into some very turbulent waters if they're going to start deciding which public broadcaste…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Many countries have publicly funded/editorially independent broadcasters. Of the below, none seem to be listed as "state affiliated": https://twitter.com/bbc https://twitter.com/deutschewelle https://twitter.com/srf https://twitter.com/radiofrance https://twitter.com/CBCNews
They put it for BBC now. And that's good.
The joke is on all of us for giving this silly man our attention. I regret that I even know about this "news story."
Is NPR state funded? (real question - I actually don't know). What is the definition of state funded? Here in Canada all the media take government subsidies especially the big ones - a lot of that I think is the economics, they simply don't generate enough revenue on their own to sustain themselves so in the process of being subsidized by the federal govt they take on the viewpoint that can be considered statist. You…
It's not just that it's state-funded - NPR's CEO got there after years of heading the relevant US government propaganda agency, as evidenced in https://www.usagm.gov/who-we-are/management-team/john-lansin... .
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the BBC's case, he's acknowledge it's not accurate. NPR's case is similar (and even less "state affiliated" than they are). https://www.bbc.com/news/business-65248196 > Mr Musk said Twitter was adjusting the label for the BBC to "publicly-funded". "We're trying to be accurate," he said. If NPR is state affiliated because of 1% government funding, SpaceX should get the tag.
Corporation for Public Broadcasting is entirely government funded, and it funds NPR.
Heck, Twitter itself used to make the distinction between state-funded without editorial control and state-affiliated (where the state has editorial control) on their own Help Center [1].
They removed the distinction on 2023-04-07 [2], two days after it slapped the state-affiliated label on NPR. That distinction had been in place for over two years
[1]: https://web.archive.org/web/20230404115255/https:/help.twitt...
[2]: https://web.archive.org/web/20230407155944/https://help.twit...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except this is a pure marketing talk, ie this phrase literally doesn't mean anything quantifiable. Unless you're trying to argue that NPR's CEO, which came directly from US government propaganda agency, maintains "editorial independence" in some magic, American-specific way.
I think it's funny that all the Americans/Russians commenting here seem to believe there are only two public broadcasters in the world: RT, and NPR. And that Twitter was merely being unfair by not labeling NPR as "state affiliated." ;) In fact, as I noted elsewhere in this thread, there are many (dozens?) of other public broadcasters around the world, most of which are not labeled as "state affiliated"--apparently in…
Well, sure, but you gotta start somewhere. At least this is a move in the right direction; let's hope for similar labelling for other media that deserve it.
Talk about rage quitting. They'll be back. And whether it's unpopular or not, CPB gets federal and state grants for part of their operating budgets . Technically state funded or affiliated in the same way auto makers get government contracts. I don't know why they are mad about the designation. Whether it implies bias or not, it's true they get state funds, ergo they are state funded media.
NPR lost the influence that it once had on Twitter, controlling narrative that suited their political ideology. So, it quit. That's great new for Twitter. NPR is far worse than a state-affiliated media. Its coverage during the riots and protests following the accidental murder of George Floyd focused on "racially disproportionate policing". It wasn't journalism. It was BLM protest using NPR as a microphone. There was…
I mean, they are, so where's the lie?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Editorial independence in action: https://www.usagm.gov/who-we-are/management-team/john-lansin...
you are asserting that having ever worked with the government necessarily means that you are silently, privately doing their editorial bidding on their behalf and I do not think that is reasonable or appropriate