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

201–210 of 1001 posts

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

#201

Post by coldtea »

Not sure NPR's track record of this, but other news outlets labelling anything they didn't approve as misinformation, and calling out any affiliations for outlets they don't approve with abandon, now go: "It's not OK when others do it to us".

>The decision by Twitter last week took the public radio network off guard. When queried by NPR tech reporter Bobby Allyn, Twitter owner Elon Musk asked how NPR functioned. Musk allowed that he might have gotten it wrong.

Notice the BS reporting wording, because of course Musk did it, it couldn't be that Twitter employees did the labelling for thousands of outlets, including NPR.

They even managed to write about how Musk "allowed that he might have gotten it wrong" in a negative light.

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

#202

Post by Avshalom »

smotched wrote: post #63

They will look cool to a certain group of people momentary but it will hurt them in the long run. The average user won't even notice their tweets are missing from their feed.

Maybe, but like it didn't hurt Fox https://www.thewrap.com/fox-news-breaks-16-month-twitter-sil...

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

#203

Post by hitpointdrew »

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.

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

#204

Post by ceejayoz »

weinzierl wrote: post #175

Most western countries have media comparable to NPR. In the UK that would be BBC, in Italy there is Rai, in Spain RTVE, in Portugal RTP and in Germany there is ARD. That makes me believe that they warrant their own label.

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.

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

#205

Post by colpabar »

carapace wrote: post #132
dustedcodes wrote: post #33

I think after COVID and all the revelations since then it is pretty clear that funding aside, every big media outlet bends over to their own government when they are being asked to push a certain narrative to the population in order to make us belief or behave in certain ways. COVID made this extremely blatantly obvious but it was already apparent before COVID. For instance, when the US and its allies wanted to invad…

You might like "Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media", a 1988 book by Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky. > It argues that the mass communication media of the U.S. "are effective and powerful ideological institutions that carry out a system-supportive propaganda function, by reliance on market forces, internalized assumptions, and self-censorship, and without overt coercion", by means of the…

I know it's cliche to say but I started reading this recently and it is amazing how well it applies to the media today. I can't wait for it to be designated a conspiracy theory!

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

#207

Post by colpabar »

bfeynman wrote: post #138
freitzkriesler2 wrote: post #131

Talk about rage quitting. They'll be back. And whether it's unpopular or not, CPB gets federal and state grants for part of their operating budgets . Technically state funded or affiliated in the same way auto makers get government contracts. I don't know why they are mad about the designation. Whether it implies bias or not, it's true they get state funds, ergo they are state funded media.

Wait wasn't the whole debacle that Twitter had special access to govt and received money for them regarding postings? Isn't twitter then also state affiliated media?

Do you mean the twitter files conspiracy theory? That didn't happen, and if it did, it was totally normal, and if it wasn't, it was justified.

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

#208

Post by TheCoelacanth »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #190
TheCoelacanth wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or Tesla, for which government carbon credits makes up roughly the same percentage of revenue that NPR gets from government funding.

Those don't technically come from the government, they come from other car manufacturers. Those car manufacturers could choose to make lower emission vehicles, but instead have chosen to pay Tesla to have Tesla's vehicles count towards their fleet average.

And NPR's funding doesn't technically come from the government, it comes from member stations licensing their content.

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

#209

Post by JohnFen »

trasz3 wrote: post #70

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.

Except, of course, that NPR is not government-sponsored to any meaningful degree.

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

#210

Post by md_ »

colpabar wrote: post #182
md_ wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2000/apr/12/julianborger "Cable Network News (CNN) and National Public Radio, (NPR) denied that the "psy-ops" officers influenced news coverage and said the internships had been stopped as soon as senior managers found out . For its part, the army said the programme was only intended to give young army media specialists some experience of how the news industry functioned." That...see…

It's insane to me that we're all just supposed to give a US army program literally titled PSYOPS the benefit of the doubt because their corporate partners said there was nothing to worry about. Does anyone remember that the entire mainstream media was in full support of everything the bush administration did in the middle east, NPR included?

I remember. I don't think it was because of some unpaid interns in the mail room or whatever.

I think this kind of cloak-and-dagger conspiracy theorizing trivializes the real, challenging, human issues of editorial independence, the complexity of fairly representing reality, etc, etc.

Post reply on HN