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

NPR quits Twitter after being labeled as 'state-affiliated media'

wbur.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

601–610 of 1001 posts

Re: NPR quits Twitter after being labeled as 'state-affiliated media'

#601

Post by danaris »

AmericanChopper wrote: post #442
jacquesm wrote: post #355

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NPR needs money and they need editorial freedom, they seem to have both. I really can't fault them for that, editorial independence is the yardstick by which media should be judged unless there is outright ownership.

State funding of media, regardless of how it’s structured, creates an obvious conflict of interest with editorial freedom. Theoretically it’s possible for a state funded media company to exercise editorial freedom, just like it would be theoretically possible for a climate study funded by ExxonMobile to exercise academic freedom, but not without acknowledging that the conflict of interest exists. Maybe they are a hig…

> State funding of media, regardless of how it’s structured, creates an obvious conflict of interest with editorial freedom.

How is this not true of any funding of media?

At least with government funding—even if there is outright editorial control—in a democratic country, you as a citizen have the ability to vote on how you think that funding and control should be exercised. Furthermore, it is massively easier to get laws in place that mandate transparency for government-funded entities than for private ones, so whatever influences there may be on their reporting would be much more visible.

Re: NPR quits Twitter after being labeled as 'state-affiliated media'

#602

Post by rjzzleep »

lostlogin wrote: post #536
yossarian1408 wrote: post #502

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Twitter, SpaceX and Tesla are not newspapers/publishers. The reason for labelling news organisations' government affiliations is for the viewer/reader to understand that there may or may not be bias, and where the funding is coming from. If NPR's government contributions are embarrassing for the organisation, it might be best for them to forgo that funding. Additionally, if there's no influence/bias, then why does it…

When Chinese and Russian state propaganda channels are getting the same label for a different situation, it’s a bit off. Your (and Elons) argument has shades of the famous ‘with us or against us’ line. Details matter.

[flagged]

Re: NPR quits Twitter after being labeled as 'state-affiliated media'

#603

Post by Teever »

rjzzleep wrote: post #595
KZerda wrote: post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or more to the point, with how much of twitter is owned by the Saudi government? https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/10/28/saudis-kingdom-hol...

[flagged]

People did care, and probably tried to tell you, but you probably weren't paying attention.

Re: NPR quits Twitter after being labeled as 'state-affiliated media'

#604

Post by iudqnolq »

hklgny wrote: post #280
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

Everyone likes to blame the server interface, but honestly that's not so bad and I think most people get over it. Mastodon's real problem in my opinion is that its primary audience today doesn't actually want anyone new to join - it's VERY toxic for newcomers who don't fit a specific mold. It's a shame, cause we really do need something new. I'm hoping some of the new decentralized ones take off. Edit: I think the co…

I'm pretty technical, but neither of those were the reasons I quickly abandoned Mastodon.

I don't care about federation, and I want algorithmic discovery. Specific I want to follow all sorts of people from around the world (on multiple mastodon servers) and have more people suggested to me based on that. Mastodon can't even reliably search across servers.

Re: NPR quits Twitter after being labeled as 'state-affiliated media'

#605

Post by lgdskhglsa »

fdschoeneman wrote: post #590

I'm sure NPR does some good work, and while I believe it is biased, I've found it to be less biased than CNN or MSNBC. I don't understand why NPR objects to being labeled as either state funded or state affiliated. It was established by an act of Congress, for one thing, and according to its own website, and its own disclosures, it does depend on federal funding. And that figure is substantially more than the claimed…

WBUR is an NPR station, not only is it not difficult to find out the writer is an employee of NPR, it's out in the open and advertised as such. Do writers need to disclose on every article that they're employees of the organization they're writing for?

https://www.wbur.org/about

Re: NPR quits Twitter after being labeled as 'state-affiliated media'

#606

Post by roflyear »

wyager wrote: post #284
ceejayoz wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That excerpt isn't about their funding. The CPB funds (in part) public radio stations . Many of those public radio stations purchase NPR-produced content . (And from other similar providers like American Public Media (Marketplace), PRX (This American Life), etc.) NPR's customers can't afford NPR's offerings without said Federal funding, which is why NPR's particularly interested in it.

An agency that is federally funded through 1 layer of intermediaries is still, in the most practical sense, federally funded.

That would make probably almost all businesses in the US federally funded, as the US government is the single largest employer of people, and those people spend their money at private businesses. The US government purchases things from private businesses.

Come on.

Re: NPR quits Twitter after being labeled as 'state-affiliated media'

#607

Post by jacquesm »

petsfed wrote: post #529
rahimnathwani wrote: post #357

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they receive only a tiny percentage of their funding from the government There are at least two ways they get government funding: - direct funding from the federal government - payment from member stations (at least 31% of revenue) who are themselves supported by government funding Without looking at the funding sources of each NPR member station, it's hard to come up with a good estimate, but it's probably a doubl…

>- payment from member stations (at least 31% of revenue) who are themselves supported by government funding I have a hard time understanding this as "state sponsored", much less as evidence that NPR has ceded editorial control. NPR estimates (and InfluenceWatch believes this estimate) that about 4% of their revenue ultimately comes from federal, state and local governments [0], via direct grants to NPR, and via gran…

Indeed. Meanwhile, the message has had its intended effect and NPR is now seen as 'tainted' by the people who would do a lot better to listen more to NPR than to various other far more biased news sources. It's the same old playbook, and Musk getting away with this is highly annoying.

Re: NPR quits Twitter after being labeled as 'state-affiliated media'

#608

Post by pclmulqdq »

jacquesm wrote: post #492
woooooo wrote: post #377

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's still federally funded. Twitter probably shouldn't have gotten into labeling who is and isn't state funded, but if they are, US/UK/NATO orgs should be fair game alongside the Russians and Chinese. NPR labeling the "state-funded media" claim as "false" when its trivially, factually true is a bad look for them as a fact-based organization.

It's irrelevant, the label implies control like with the Russians and the Chinese, and that control simply isn't there.

What do you think about Al Jazeera's funding and level of control?

Re: NPR quits Twitter after being labeled as 'state-affiliated media'

#609

Post by lostlogin »

DrThunder wrote: post #465
generic92034 wrote: post #425

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you name any media company being truly independent? Or is any owner excluded from the potential list of dependencies?

I'm discussing government independence specifically, not whether companies are beholden to someone else. Obviously all businesses are beholden to someone. Yes you should always have an interest in what/who companies are beholden to. There's a reason Nike and Apple don't chastise the Chinese government.

Twitter is funny in this regard, why is Musk so keen on Russia and China?

Re: NPR quits Twitter after being labeled as 'state-affiliated media'

#610

Post by kube-system »

hilbertseries wrote: post #504
DrThunder wrote: post #363

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don't. Just because you say you do doesn't make it so. When a big part of your funding comes from the people that can vote to cut it at any moment you do not have true independence. This is as silly as the argument saying the 1st amendment isn't violated by social media when you have the government literally asking these companies for censorship.

NPR continuing to publish programming critical of Trump during the Trump presidency, is a pretty strong indication they have editorial independence.

Heck, Voice of America also did the same and they are definitely state affiliated.
Post reply on HN