12 ms·

It's not just Twitter, it's the media in general. When I watch CNBC, and they decide to stop airing the President's presser because he's lying, that says to me

by daenz 6y ago

It's not just Twitter, it's the media in general. When I watch CNBC, and they decide to stop airing the President's presser because he's lying, that says to me that the media believes that they should do the thinking for me. That says a lot about how they view the public. We're building a world where "think for yourself" means "defer your thinking to Trusted Sources™", which is not a world that I support. EDIT>> s/CNN/CNBC

sk5t 6y ago
Some of the networks wisely determined that the speech was unfounded, baseless, and harmful. News networks do not need to be a spigot for outright lies and fabrication.
- RonanTheGrey 6y ago
  Sorry, I want to know what my public servants are saying. How we can we make sure they are serving us if their words are being hidden from us?
  - eyeball 6y ago
    The party will take care of that for you. Shhh.
  - jackson1442 6y ago
    Wasn't it streamed by the White House itself as well? Should every TV station be required to air every public servant's statements? Surely going to the source isn't too big of a burden for most.
    - bot41 6y ago
      it's not every tv station in question it's about news stations covering the election. 'every public servant' is not in question.. it's about the current president of the USA
  - ntsplnkv2 6y ago
    How can you make sure they are serving you if he doesn't hold press conferences for hundreds of days?
  - thomastjeffery 6y ago
    And you do. There wasn't anything of substance said in the part of the speech that wasn't aired. Feel free to watch the whole thing. No one is stopping you. There is a difference between censorship and moderation. Trump was literally trolling on CNBC's platform, and they chose to confront that.
  - jpindar 6y ago
    Watch it on CSPAN. That's what CSPAN is for, showing complete government events without interruption or editorializing.
- blub 6y ago
  People that have a working brain shouldn't care what networks think or determine. Those networks must limit themselves to neutrally reporting the news and let the people make up their minds. This election has proven that US, but also Western-European media are extremely biased and see themselves as the arbiters of truth. Reading German media I noticed - without exaggeration - that Trump was getting worse press than actual real dictators. Mainstream German newspapers had articles where they invited mental health specialists to speculate on what mental afflictions Trump might be suffering from. Extremely unethical show from the mainstream media.
  - ghaff 6y ago
    >see themselves as the arbiters of truth They are at some level. Of course, a newspaper isn't going to present all sources as being of equal authority. If someone is spouting nonsense at some point you cut them off.
    - seek3r 6y ago
      I agree with you, but I think that I also get the opposite PoV. Sure, it happened to Trump this time because it was telling lies. But imagine what would happen if they did the same to a president who was telling truths that the network didn’t like. It’s about the power that allows the act, not the act itself.
      - ghaff 6y ago
        The media clearly has power. And it's not wrong to observe that the mainstream English language media tends to be associated with a certain class, worldview, and educational system. On the other hand, there has never been an era when individuals had as much ability to male their voices heard or, for better or worse, such diversity of news (and "news") sources. There's also the fact that Twitter is a platform and not a publication. And there are certainly questions of what happens when dominant platforms that control access to eyeballs start regulating what people can people can publish there according to reality as it exists for the tech world.
  - 6y ago
- skinkestek 6y ago
  Here's the problem : Most mainstream media has been pushing the well known hoax about "fine people on both sides" being about white supremacists for far too long to have much credibility left when wanting to point out others unfounded, baseless and harmful lies.
cma 6y ago
They should be able to pause throughout and offer analysis or not run it altogether, if they are a news organization and not a propaganda organ.
cblconfederate 6y ago
Cnn is liable for their content though. Twitter isn't
- daenz 6y ago
  Are you trying to suggest that if a news network interviews someone, and that person lies, the network is responsible?
  - cblconfederate 6y ago
    lies are not illegal. if what the person says is illegal though, a publisher can be sued and face the same liability
    - daenz 6y ago
      What does this have to do with CNBC discontinuing Trump's press conference? Do you think he said something illegal?
      - cblconfederate 6y ago
        No. I just answered your question and pointed out that there's a big difference in the legal protections offered to twitter. What twitter did is borderline ethical, it would have been more honest to ban trump rather than plaster his tweets with their own opinion of them.
ummonk 6y ago
What are you talking about? CNN aired the president's presser in full without stopping it; I know because I watched it live on CNN. Are you mixing up CNN with other networks?
- daenz 6y ago
  My mistake, it was CNBC[0] 0. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=012BzDoFqiY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=012BzDoFqiY
- joshuamorton 6y ago
  Ultimately at some point trump won't be president. Should the media continue to show his press conferences then? So that voters can choose which president they listen to, the actual one or the fake one?
mindslight 6y ago
> We're building a world where "think for yourself" means "defer your thinking to Trusted Sources™", which is not a world that I support. "defer your thinking to Trusted Sources" is the world we're coming from. Our incoherent polarization is a result of the traditional authorities having been routed around (and then leaning into their own demise). We've apparently got an awfully long road ahead of us to get to a world where everyone is actually thinking for themselves, as demonstrated by how readily blatant lies spread when they're politically and personally comforting.
ghaff 6y ago
That's always been true of the media in general. The publisher of the NYT presumably said something (years ago) to the effect of "We don't give people what they want; we give them what they should have." Arguably there are far fewer or more porous gatekeepers today relative to the historic norm--for better or worse.

by daenz 6y ago

sk5t 6y ago

Some of the networks wisely determined that the speech was unfounded, baseless, and harmful. News networks do not need to be a spigot for outright lies and fabrication.

RonanTheGrey 6y ago
Sorry, I want to know what my public servants are saying. How we can we make sure they are serving us if their words are being hidden from us?
- eyeball 6y ago
  The party will take care of that for you. Shhh.
- jackson1442 6y ago
  Wasn't it streamed by the White House itself as well? Should every TV station be required to air every public servant's statements? Surely going to the source isn't too big of a burden for most.
  - bot41 6y ago
    it's not every tv station in question it's about news stations covering the election. 'every public servant' is not in question.. it's about the current president of the USA
- ntsplnkv2 6y ago
  How can you make sure they are serving you if he doesn't hold press conferences for hundreds of days?
- thomastjeffery 6y ago
  And you do. There wasn't anything of substance said in the part of the speech that wasn't aired. Feel free to watch the whole thing. No one is stopping you. There is a difference between censorship and moderation. Trump was literally trolling on CNBC's platform, and they chose to confront that.
- jpindar 6y ago
  Watch it on CSPAN. That's what CSPAN is for, showing complete government events without interruption or editorializing.
blub 6y ago
People that have a working brain shouldn't care what networks think or determine. Those networks must limit themselves to neutrally reporting the news and let the people make up their minds. This election has proven that US, but also Western-European media are extremely biased and see themselves as the arbiters of truth. Reading German media I noticed - without exaggeration - that Trump was getting worse press than actual real dictators. Mainstream German newspapers had articles where they invited mental health specialists to speculate on what mental afflictions Trump might be suffering from. Extremely unethical show from the mainstream media.
- ghaff 6y ago
  >see themselves as the arbiters of truth They are at some level. Of course, a newspaper isn't going to present all sources as being of equal authority. If someone is spouting nonsense at some point you cut them off.
  - seek3r 6y ago
    I agree with you, but I think that I also get the opposite PoV. Sure, it happened to Trump this time because it was telling lies. But imagine what would happen if they did the same to a president who was telling truths that the network didn’t like. It’s about the power that allows the act, not the act itself.
    - ghaff 6y ago
      The media clearly has power. And it's not wrong to observe that the mainstream English language media tends to be associated with a certain class, worldview, and educational system. On the other hand, there has never been an era when individuals had as much ability to male their voices heard or, for better or worse, such diversity of news (and "news") sources. There's also the fact that Twitter is a platform and not a publication. And there are certainly questions of what happens when dominant platforms that control access to eyeballs start regulating what people can people can publish there according to reality as it exists for the tech world.
- 6y ago
skinkestek 6y ago
Here's the problem : Most mainstream media has been pushing the well known hoax about "fine people on both sides" being about white supremacists for far too long to have much credibility left when wanting to point out others unfounded, baseless and harmful lies.

cma 6y ago

They should be able to pause throughout and offer analysis or not run it altogether, if they are a news organization and not a propaganda organ.

cblconfederate 6y ago

Cnn is liable for their content though. Twitter isn't

daenz 6y ago
Are you trying to suggest that if a news network interviews someone, and that person lies, the network is responsible?
- cblconfederate 6y ago
  lies are not illegal. if what the person says is illegal though, a publisher can be sued and face the same liability
  - daenz 6y ago
    What does this have to do with CNBC discontinuing Trump's press conference? Do you think he said something illegal?
    - cblconfederate 6y ago
      No. I just answered your question and pointed out that there's a big difference in the legal protections offered to twitter. What twitter did is borderline ethical, it would have been more honest to ban trump rather than plaster his tweets with their own opinion of them.

ummonk 6y ago

What are you talking about? CNN aired the president's presser in full without stopping it; I know because I watched it live on CNN. Are you mixing up CNN with other networks?

daenz 6y ago
My mistake, it was CNBC[0] 0. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=012BzDoFqiY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=012BzDoFqiY
joshuamorton 6y ago
Ultimately at some point trump won't be president. Should the media continue to show his press conferences then? So that voters can choose which president they listen to, the actual one or the fake one?

mindslight 6y ago

> We're building a world where "think for yourself" means "defer your thinking to Trusted Sources™", which is not a world that I support. "defer your thinking to Trusted Sources" is the world we're coming from. Our incoherent polarization is a result of the traditional authorities having been routed around (and then leaning into their own demise). We've apparently got an awfully long road ahead of us to get to a world where everyone is actually thinking for themselves, as demonstrated by how readily blatant lies spread when they're politically and personally comforting.

ghaff 6y ago

That's always been true of the media in general. The publisher of the NYT presumably said something (years ago) to the effect of "We don't give people what they want; we give them what they should have." Arguably there are far fewer or more porous gatekeepers today relative to the historic norm--for better or worse.