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

991–1000 of 1001 posts

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

#991

Post by paulej »

riffic wrote: post #361
VWWHFSfQ wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

for some reason I'm annoyed by all the @ symbols in these new things

it was annoying to me to type it too! There are also webfinger URLs that serve the same purpose like https://mastodon.social/@gargron == @gargron@mastodon.social

That's not a WebFinger URL. WebFinger URLs point to /.well-known/ path that returns a JSON document with links to other places for the user. To simplify WebFinger use by a human, we introduced acct:user@example.com syntax. And (at least my) WebFinger clients can assume the acct: part, much like email clients do for the email: scheme.

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

#992

Post by jppittma »

nostromo wrote: post #349
jacquesm wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Besides the fact that they receive only a tiny percentage of their funding from the government the bigger issue is that of editorial control and NPR is pretty clean as far as I can see. Unlike most of the other entities labeled 'State Affiliated Media'. Naming NPR in one breath with those others is intentionally tarnishing them and playing to the crowd, which is something that Elon has been engaging in in a very spec…

If the public funding isn’t important to them, then don’t take it and become truly independent. Or keep the funding and be open about it. I suspect most of NPR's followers are fine with their public funding, it's literally in the name. They're probably more upset about all their corporate funding. Tesla’s funding is neither here nor there; it’s not a news outlet.

I feel like you're acting in bad faith conflating "public" and "state" in this instance. Wikipedia is an apt comparison that receives the vast majority of its funding through donations. It has received grants, but it's not "state run media" at all.

If the bar for being state affiliated is receiving money from the federal government, then I'm sure every news outlet and business of reasonable size qualifies (especially after the PPP loans).

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

#994

Post by dang »

wpietribs wrote: post #629
hgsgm wrote: post #617

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do people hire for (non-PR) jobs based on tweets?

[flagged]

Personal attacks aren't allowed. We've banned this account.

Breaking HN's rules like this will get your main account banned as well, so please don't.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

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

#995

Post by retrocryptid »

chiefalchemist wrote: post #846
retrocryptid wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exxon gets a larger percentage of its income from the federal government in subsidies, yet we seldom (if ever) apply "government funded" to that organization. What's your definition of "state funded"?

Not being snarky but...maybe we should label them as such. If it's accurate then so be it. The irony? We'd have to rely on the media and "modern journalism" to apply the proper labels.

So Tesla, SpaceX and Solar City get labeled as "government funded?"

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

#996

Post by Phileosopher »

yamtaddle wrote: post #514
nostromo wrote: post #413

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Money can be easily tracked. Editorial independence cannot be. I actually think NPR has been captured by their audience in the same way MSNBC and Fox News has been. They know member donations are their biggest funding source, so they largely tell their audience what they want to hear. Put another way, I don't think perfect editorial independence exists. Everyone knows where their bread is being buttered. Having a bad…

> I actually think NPR has been captured by their audience in the same way MSNBC and Fox News has been. I... don't know. When the topic comes up there sure are a lot of us NPR listeners who are in rather a love-hate relationship with it, leaning toward "hate". Half the time I'm listening I'm shaking my head at how very self-parody-like NPR they're being or yelling at them to stop doing such shitty coverage. Like, the…

I agree, but in many ways it's a product of syndication. When you get out of that influence (e.g., independently published podcasters) the scope of quality becomes _much_ broader.

I'm old enough to remember finding good-quality content on NPR, but I now look toward podcasts in the special interest I'm looking for to find good-quality audio-streamed information.

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

#997

Post by nailer »

LastTrain wrote: post #691
nailer wrote: post #489

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your logical fallacy is incredulity. What Twitter did was absolutely ethical, and since it applies to all government funded media, it is not political in nature. Yes anyone accepting government ad money should be labelled as well.

I'm not sure what ethical means in this context, or what it has to do with them being wrong. What responsibility does Twitter have to anyone? They are a privately held corporation. Where they were 'wrong' is in not being consistent in their labeling, and the subtext surrounding that - of which we are all aware but some of us (like you) are unwilling to acknowledge in order to advance an argument or to just Troll. But…

I think you don’t understand the difference between wrong and incorrect.

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

#998

Post by t3pfaff »

sidfthec wrote: post #282
bilekas wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because every penny counts. What business would turn around and say : "We don't need that 1%, you can have it back". It's state affiliated. Like Tesla. Like any company who received covid relief. Tax breaks etc. Less than 1 percentage is simply not influential. It's disingenuous to say it's owned by the government.

> It's state affiliated. Like Tesla. Like any company who received covid relief. Tax breaks etc. So... everyone and everything is state affiliated and should be labeled as such? That's obviously not the case. State affiliated should be limited to organizations that are influenced/controlled significantly by the state, which NPR is not. This is actually the definition that Twitter advertises.

I believe the "state affiliated media" tagline is as you might guess, intended for media who's editorial opinions should be taken with their state affiliation in context. What utility does it serve to label SpaceX, Tesla, Lockheed, Boeing, or any other company that does not publish editorial opinions as "state affiliated". I don't get what people don't understand here.

NPR and PBS would not exist right now or in the future if their government funding grants were revoked. That puts a nonexistent bias on their editorial decisions. I seem to remember NPR "leaking"/breaking the story on WMDs in Iraq with one of their journalists directly quoting internal contacts in the Pentagon as their source. They are clearly far from immune to being used as agents of propaganda. That being said, I personally hold both NPR & PBS Newshour in very high regard. I do think that placing them in them in the same categorisation as RT or even the BBC is reductionist. Perhaps there should be varying levels of "state affiliated media" labeling.

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

#999

Post by mcv »

Steltek wrote: post #657
VWWHFSfQ wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

for some reason I'm annoyed by all the @ symbols in these new things

I like the Matrix format, "@user:domain.tld"

I prefer the email format: user@domain.tld. There's no reason that can't be used for social media.

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

#1000

Post by throwaway743 »

retrocryptid wrote: post #995
chiefalchemist wrote: post #846

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not being snarky but...maybe we should label them as such. If it's accurate then so be it. The irony? We'd have to rely on the media and "modern journalism" to apply the proper labels.

So Tesla, SpaceX and Solar City get labeled as "government funded?"

Yes
Post reply on HN