From the you-can't-make-this-stuff-up department, NPR then ran to TikTok.
Running home to mama I suppose.
NPR quits Twitter after being labeled as 'state-affiliated media'
881–890 of 1001 posts
Re: NPR quits Twitter after being labeled as 'state-affiliated media'
#882Earlier quoted context omitted.
Elon's playing word games. When the average person talks about State Affiliated Media they're referring to editorial control. As far as I know NPR has always had editorial control and goes to great lengths to maintain neutrality in their writing. They've certainly screwed up in major ways before, but compared to MSNBC, Fox, the NYT, NYP, and CNN I'd say NPR looks like a saint. The irony I see here is that Twitter is…
I was going to mention Radio Free Europe as a really good example of egregious, western state-sponsored media, but then on a lark, I looked up how well regarded they are, bias-wise, and now I don't know what to think.
Western state-backed media is regarded highly by mainstream Western media watchdogs? You don't say.
Re: NPR quits Twitter after being labeled as 'state-affiliated media'
#883Re: NPR quits Twitter after being labeled as 'state-affiliated media'
#884Should Twitter itself get a state sponsored label for getting concessions from San Francisco on their headquarters? 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.
The labels are for media publishers. They are to make readers aware of the motivations of the writers. This was Twitter practice long before Musk. He just removed the bias toward not labeling US media companies.
Why would SpaceX need a label? “Warning: this rocket fuel is affiliated with the US government so maybe don’t trust it’s opinion on open flames”
Re: NPR quits Twitter after being labeled as 'state-affiliated media'
#885Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Ok, so to amend OP's original point: Should Twitter come with a label as "state-owned" considering both the Qatari and Saudi governments hold a significant stake in the company?
Twitter doesn’t report the news. It’s a platform. Labels are for publishers of news. Why is everyone having such a hard to grokking this
Re: NPR quits Twitter after being labeled as 'state-affiliated media'
#886Earlier 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…
Why not just look at the NPR page we're discussing, which says 13% of public radio station revenue is from federal funds? 13% of 31% is 4%. Edit: The 13% is from all government funds, not just federal.
NPR has a history of downplaying their government funding, I'm not sure if you should use them as your main source. I know in the past they've said it was around 5%, while independent investigations found it was closer to 20-40%
Re: NPR quits Twitter after being labeled as 'state-affiliated media'
#887Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Should Elon's account (or SpaceX or Telsa) have the same label because of their significant government funding? Are they a "media" company primarily dedicated to the practice of journalism?
[dead]
i believe they are in the process of including more labels to State-affiliated and State-funded media
Re: NPR quits Twitter after being labeled as 'state-affiliated media'
#888Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ok, so to amend OP's original point: Should Twitter come with a label as "state-owned" considering both the Qatari and Saudi governments hold a significant stake in the company?
Twitter doesn’t report the news. It’s a platform. Labels are for publishers of news. Why is everyone having such a hard to grokking this
> Twitter doesn’t report the news. It’s a platform. Labels are for publishers of news.
“A platform” is just an internet term for a kind of publisher (roughly corresponding to “an online publisher who mostly publishes things for which it is – or would be, if it was operating in the US – protected from the liability usually attached to publishers via DMCA section 230.”)
Re: NPR quits Twitter after being labeled as 'state-affiliated media'
#889It's so wild witnessing the degradation of Twitter.
People keep saying this but I haven't noticed at all, I stopped using it for years but now I am back and have noticed only improvements
same
I take it for what it is, a notification engine for "influencers" and media, and a time-waster, and basically nothing else
it's essentially not good for anything else, if you put too much faith in it to do things like learning or discovering new things, you're going to be disappointed
but at what it does I think it's better than a couple of years ago when I last spent some time using it - it was unmitigated garbage at everything back then
Re: NPR quits Twitter after being labeled as 'state-affiliated media'
#890Earlier 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…
> If NPR's government contributions are embarrassing for the organisation, it might be best for them to forgo that funding. Ah, yes, the old "if I misrepresent the issue and assign a negative emotion to it, other people will see it as bad" trope. That's fun. Do you have any evidence they find the contributions "embarrassing" as opposed to finding the label an intentionally-misleading dog whistle? Or is that not somet…
I don’t think this really answers the greater point that the commenter made though. Without the public funding, they wouldn’t have the label—-whether they deem it embarrassing or opposed to its perceived meaning.