Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Is it "childish antics" for the Guardian to have their own political viewpoint? When a journal is biased... it is biased. Objectivism is one thing. Bias is another. Bias at the US elections shit is just another level.
> When a journal is biased... it is biased. I would like to know which newspaper or journal is not biased.
Why the Guardian is no longer posting on X
141–150 of 373 posts
Re: Why the Guardian is no longer posting on X
#142It'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…
I can't high-five this enough.
Re: Why the Guardian is no longer posting on X
#143[flagged]
This tired and unfunny 'joke' might at least be relevant when it's a little-known individual announcing their departure, but less so when it's a national newspaper with 11 million followers.
Re: Why the Guardian is no longer posting on X
#144Earlier quoted context omitted.
Musk claims he is trying to be an open and free speech town square. I don’t have an opinion on whether he did this or not but it is certainly the case that if he put his finger on the scales that goes against his claims.
Did X suppress support of the other side? The Hunter Biden laptop story is a prime example of the difference between X and Twitter. The suppression of Covid debate is another example. On old Twitter you could call someone a Nazi and accuse them (falsely) of genocide. But if you “dead name” a celebrity, you’d get banned.
Yes, a user was banned for sharing the Vance dossier
https://www.fastcompany.com/91198871/why-x-suspended-journal...
Re: Why the Guardian is no longer posting on X
#145It'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…
Opinions are one thing. X has become a bastion of conspiracy theories and outright fabrications with it's hyper-partisan owner leading the charge.
Re: Why the Guardian is no longer posting on X
#146Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is it "childish antics" for the Guardian to have their own political viewpoint? Musk can have a preferred candidate and political stance. And he can run Twitter accordingly. The Guardian can have a preferred candidate and political stance. And they can choose the platforms they use accordingly. It all seems perfectly reasonable to me.
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.
Journalism should have a bias for the truth. But one political camp has spent decades working the refs, calling truth-telling "bias", and even building parallel media ecosystems that project a message completely detached from factual reality. I don't know how we come back from this.
Re: Why the Guardian is no longer posting on X
#147> X users will still be able to share our articles, and the nature of live news reporting means we will still occasionally embed content from X within our article pages. I wonder if that'll turn out to be true. There's no reason Musk has to let them, and I could see him just blocking links from The Guardian in retaliation. For the record, I don't support temper tantrums on either side, and it feels like this is a ver…
The issue is that a huge chunk of journalists have been horrifically addicted to Twitter from long before Musk's time.
Realistically everyone in that field should've bailed the second subscribers got bumped to the top of replies across the website.
Re: Why the Guardian is no longer posting on X
#148Yann 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
That's a very silly conflation.
The Guardian is a newspaper. They broadly have two sections: reporting and editorial. Reporting is basically that. Now you can (correctly) argue that there is bias on the reporting side in how they choose to cover certain stories, how they choose what stories to cover, etc but there are still minimum standards they adhere to, like they won't knowingly print anything objectively false. They'll issue corrections and retractions if necessary.
The editorial side is quite literally opinion. The Guardian, like any publication, can issue their opinion on a given political race. But you know that's opinion. They'll argue why for their position. You can agree or disagree with their reasoning or conclusions. But it's intellectually honest.
Now compare that to Elon and Twitter. It's not even remotely the same. Twitter has an algorithm to decide what to show people. He's used it to push his own posts [1]. His own posts have openly pushed conspiracy theories [2], things that are provably false. This can go as far as pushing literal Nazi conspiracy theories (aka the Great Replacement [3]) and make sure as many people as possible see it.
It is utterly disingenuous to conflate the two.
[1]: https://www.theverge.com/2023/2/14/23600358/elon-musk-tweets...
[2]: https://www.vox.com/technology/2023/5/20/23730607/elon-musk-...
[3]: https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-news/elon-musk-...
Re: Why the Guardian is no longer posting on X
#149Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is it "childish antics" for the Guardian to have their own political viewpoint? Musk can have a preferred candidate and political stance. And he can run Twitter accordingly. The Guardian can have a preferred candidate and political stance. And they can choose the platforms they use accordingly. It all seems perfectly reasonable to me.
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.
What if I specifically want to consume media that is biased towards technological exploration and advancement?
Re: Why the Guardian is no longer posting on X
#150Earlier quoted context omitted.
You haven't made any kind of case that The Guardian is "undermining the free flow of information" > it seems they would impose This is your opinion, freely expressed. It's neither evidence nor was it undermined by The Guardian. > Isn't Guardian a "news" outlet "strawman framing" with "a side of airquotes". Even so, can you point to any regulations in the UK or US that define what a "news" outlet is and how they are e…
>You haven't made any kind of case that The Guardian is "undermining the free flow of information" I view it as an attempt by a group of left-leaning media/news outlets hoping to de-crown X out of its popularity as a neutral forum for expressing political views. Yes, these are my opinions or ... "comment replies". People can post their comments or fact-checks, the things Guardian people don't like to engage with.
Some might hold a popular delusion that X is a neutral forum for expressing political views.
X is not a neutral forum.