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

Why the Guardian is no longer posting on X

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 373 posts

Re: Why the Guardian is no longer posting on X

#231

Post by tzs »

jasonfarnon wrote: post #176
selivanovp wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do not know if Musk tweaked the algorithm in favor of Trump as I've left Twitter several years ago due to getting tired of propaganda bots. But what I do know is that Google and Facebook (as well as previous Twitter owners) practicing targeted propaganda for years already, pushing political agenda in your throat no matter how you ask them to not recommend you specific authors, channels or topics. I don't think we a…

Don't forget youtube. Of course, when they were doing that, it wasn't "pushing political agenda" it was just "doing what's right" and "respecting the rights of others". Are there books recounting the history of editorial positions put forth by these platforms? I really had no idea where google stood on political issues in the 2000s. I remember thinking they were quite pro-free speech sometimes callously so through th…

I watch a lot of YouTube, often without an ad blocker, and I see almost no political content on my home page. The only place I regular saw political content was in the in-video ads which appeared to be just normal paid ads purchased by the campaigns.

Re: Why the Guardian is no longer posting on X

#232

Post by lend000 »

result2vino wrote: post #117
lend000 wrote: post #17

It's wild how much most people rely on being in an echo chamber. It takes a psychological toll being confronted with opinions that challenge your worldview on a regular basis, especially if you cannot easily dismiss them. I haven't seen any of the things the Guardian mentions on my feed -- it's mostly startup related, software related, finance news, and science/medical stuff with maybe ~10% of posts I come across hav…

I’m sick to death of everything being described as “opinions that challenge one’s worldview”. There are opinions and there are opinions. There are also philosophical differences of opinion vs things that blatantly factually untrue. Remember “alternative facts”? from the last US election? That was a thing that someone legitimately said in response to specific tangible factually incorrect statements being made about th…

Is your X feed an unfiltered firehose of utter garbage? Mine isn't. That really only speaks to the fact that the algorithm finds that you are more likely to engage with garbage.

Re: Why the Guardian is no longer posting on X

#233

Post by lend000 »

throw16180339 wrote: post #182
lend000 wrote: post #17

It's wild how much most people rely on being in an echo chamber. It takes a psychological toll being confronted with opinions that challenge your worldview on a regular basis, especially if you cannot easily dismiss them. I haven't seen any of the things the Guardian mentions on my feed -- it's mostly startup related, software related, finance news, and science/medical stuff with maybe ~10% of posts I come across hav…

> It's wild how much most people rely on being in an echo chamber. It takes a psychological toll being confronted with opinions that challenge your worldview on a regular basis, especially if you cannot easily dismiss them. I can easily dismiss antisemitic conspiracy theories, queerphobia, bigotry, and racism. There's an infinite stream of garbage positions, why would would I engage with them?

As I mentioned in a sibling comment, your feed is only toxic insofar you are likely to engage with it. I have never seen a single post on my feed of the vein you are describing.

By the way, there is equally ridiculous garbage on the left, if you go looking for it. You are doing the same thing that every partisan media outlet does, the oldest trick in the book: arguing against a strawman. Just because there is some leftist out there who wants to subsidize transgender operations for illegal immigrants or who wants to cancel anyone who assumes your gender, should I generalize that opinion to you and every left-leaning person on HN?

Re: Why the Guardian is no longer posting on X

#234

Post by croes »

seydor wrote: post #30

Yann Lecun is also telling everyone on Twitter very loudly that he won't be posting on Twitter. The Guardian in another article explains that they are annoyed because Musk used twitter to promote his preferred candidate. The Guardian itself used their own platform to publicly endorse Harris. This deja-vu of childish antics is just comical in 2024

Did the Guardian also use lies and fear mongering like Trump and Musk did?

Re: Why the Guardian is no longer posting on X

#235

Post by davorak »

booleandilemma wrote: post #185
sagolikasoppor wrote: post #161

[flagged]

I'm wondering if it's just economics. Are they losing money from X existing? Are they trying to start some "let's all move away from X" trend?

> Are they trying to start some "let's all move away from X" trend?

Can not think of a reason that would not have applied before musk took over.

Re: Why the Guardian is no longer posting on X

#236

Post by wyclif »

gerdesj wrote: post #195
n0id34 wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's ridiculous for any media to have a political bias, defeats the entire purpose of the media if it's already skewed when it's consumed.

Let's go back say 40 odd years. I'm from the UK. Back then "media" largely consisted of three, soon to be four channels on your analogue TV and a lot of newspapers and magazines. The media was largely passive except for the letters pages, which mostly featured real people, and the likes of "Readers's Wives" which was mostly bollocks (quite literally). If we look at the newspapers back then: they all had a clear and w…

This is a great comment. It was really the same kind of landscape in US media, only without the topless women.

NYT, WaPo, Newsweek et al. could be counted on as being liberal, while Wall Street Journal and the New York Post were popular conservative options. You also had a wide range of commentary on the telly, including Firing Line and the McLaughlin Group.

Re: Why the Guardian is no longer posting on X

#237

Post by tzs »

rurp wrote: post #139
oneeyedpigeon wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Guardian is a newspaper with a long-proclaimed left-wing bias. Musk has claimed that X is politically neutral.

Musk claims a lot of things. Amplifying right wing propaganda and conspiracy theories, often from his own twitter account, is not politically neutral.

At least it provides some entertainment in seeing conspiracy theories I'd never heard of. Just now Twitter showed me a tweet about how offshore wind energy projects will lead to the rapid extinction of Right whales.

Apparently this is going to be the Trump administration's justification for trying to kill offshore wind power.

Of course as is par for the course the people who actually study and work with Right whales say that theory is wrong and there is little evidence of serious harm to the whales from such projects.

Re: Why the Guardian is no longer posting on X

#239

Post by adastra22 »

jfengel wrote: post #119
adastra22 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The Guardian itself used their own platform to publicly endorse Harris. Isn’t The Guardian a UK publication?

Yes, they are a UK publication. But they cover a lot of US news and have a significant American readership. So, like American newspapers, they have an informed opinion and an audience that wishes to hear that opinion. That's how newspaper endorsements work. In this case the writer of the endorsement cannot themselves vote, but their opinion can still have weight. The Economist, another UK-based periodical with a more…

At least here in America, endorsement of foreign politicians is seen as election interference, and generally not done.

Re: Why the Guardian is no longer posting on X

#240

Post by grahamj »

valval wrote: post #213
jslaby wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just created an account on X and the list that pops up to follow: Elon, Terrence Williams, Sebastian Gorka, Dinesh D'Souza, Rand Paul, Dan Bongino, Leo Terrell, Tom Fitton, Mark Levin, Tiffany Smiley, Breitbart News, Matt Gaetz... not a single "left leaning" account other than Joe Biden and maybe Neil Degrasse Tyson, but I chose sports and science as my interests. Open and free speech, right..

Since it’s the platform that takes freedom of speech the most seriously, it caters to people who are for freedom of speech.

Hey remember this?

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41662702

Fun times

Post reply on HN