311–320 of 1001 posts
Yeah, it's not like their CEO came directly from the relevant government bureau, right? I'm not a fan of Elon (or most companies, for that matter), but this was the right thing to do. Previously the "government-sponsored" badge was nothing more than US propaganda.
I wonder if this will have any domino effect, right now the only thing holding Twitter together is its network effects. According to the article on NPR's site[0], they have 8.7 million followers and run 52 different accounts so Twitter is losing a pretty important partner. Also, no mention of Mastodon in this announcement. It sounds like they're just going to use Facebook for the time being. 0: https://www.npr.org/20…
> no mention of Mastodon in this announcement Mastodon blew its moment. It could have eaten Twitter’s lunch. But onboarding—specifically, choosing a server—was too tedious for non-niche adoption.
If you think that is a coincidence, and NPR is totally not de facto state-media, I have a bridge to sell you.
Props to Twitter's new leadership for doing what is ostensibly right, though who knows what their motivation is.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In their rebuttal [0] to this, they cited a statement from the White House Press Secretary: > When asked about Twitter's decision during the White House's daily briefing, press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre declined to address Twitter's content rules specifically. But she also defended NPR's journalism. > "There is no doubt of the independence of NPR journalists," Jean-Pierre said. "If you've ever been on the receivin…
How ironic that NPR uses the state's talking points to argue they're not affiliated with the state.
So in this context who better? Also it's not like they received a real response from Twitter when they asked:
"In response to an NPR email for this story seeking comment and requesting details about what in particular might have led to the new designation, the company's press account auto-replied with a poop emoji — a message it has been sending to journalists for weeks."
[1] https://www.npr.org/2023/04/05/1168158549/twitter-npr-state-...
Musk (and Trump) are really, really good at vocally saying things everyone agrees with to cover the fact they're doing the exact opposite. They're populist champions to such a degree that their supporters (and even the media / independents) can't fathom they don't actually care at all. Free speech, no wars, anti-corruption in DC, etc. These are all things most people agree with. If some of the stuff Trump/Elon did se…
Good. It's clear now that Twitter is just an information control mechanism for Musk, and journalists should quit their addiction to it. I think every major news outlet should have their own ActivityPub compatible service, essentially as a modern replacement for RSS.
https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/S-F-controller-hails-...
Should Elon's account (or SpaceX or Telsa) have the same label because of their significant government funding?
It's hard to see this as anything but silly politics games.
How on earth can anyone say "falsely labeled"? NPR does get money from the federal government, that is an undisputable fact. How are they not "state-affilated"? I don't care how small a % of the budget is money from the government. The fact they take any money at all from the gov makes them sate-affilated.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The BBC isn't comparable to NPR. The Chairman of the BBC is appointed by the UK's King-in-Council, on the advice of the Secretary of State. Similarly, RAI is owned by the Italian Ministry of Economy and Finance; RTVE is state owned. Not sure on RTP and ARD; they sound more NPR-ish from their Wikipedias, although ARD appears to be paid for by a mandatory license fee like the BBC is.
That is a bit my point. The details differ and the naming differs but I'd argue that by and large and in the broad public perception there are three categories: Privately-owned commercial, state controlled and a third category that is really neither. Regardless of the details and legalities people know it when they see it, so an own label would be justified.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's also interesting that we don't see the state affiliated label on SpaceX yet.
It's also interesting that you think SpaceX is a media company