4 ms·

> Should Elon's account (or SpaceX or Telsa) have the same label because of their significant government funding? Are they a "media" company primarily dedicate

> Should Elon's account (or SpaceX or Telsa) have the same label because of their significant government funding? Are they a "media" company primarily dedicated to the practice of journalism?

ImPostingOnHN 4y ago
the account is media, and it's as state affiliated as NPR, if not moreso as for whether it's a media company, that's irrelevant and seems to be an attempt to move the goalposts
- NoZebra120vClip 4y ago
  It's not irrelevant. I think it's a useful distinction. All companies have PR departments (except, of course, Twitter, which only responds with poop emoji.) Company PR departments generally report on the company and things which directly affect the company. They issue press releases and they comment on litigation and they celebrate anniversaries. Journalism organizations and public information outlets don't merely report on themselves, they report on the world, or topics of interest to their advertisers or donors or governments or supporters. Therefore there's a wider range and there's a third-party nature to it. Journalists may be investigative, or sometimes they may just regurgitate press releases from various companies. From wide ranges of different types of various companies. Even if a news outlet reports only on dentistry, there's still a wide range of dental topics that are covered, not just Colgate and their toothpaste. So I agree; NPR should be properly labeled according to the government which supports them. So should PBS, right? There's no shame in that. Why don't Facebook and Google do it too? YouTube regularly slaps a label on government mouthpieces that I tune into there. It's important to be even-handed and label the Chinese and Russians the same as the Venezuelans and Germans and Irish and Catholics and Orthodox the same as the United States.
  - ImPostingOnHN 4y ago
    I actually don't think it's a useful distinction, since the topic is media, not media companies. SpaceX's and Tesla's social media accounts are media, and they're both as state-affiliated, if not moreso, than NPR folks reading posts by Tesla and SpaceX should know that aside from elmu's history of disingenuousness and outright lying, such posts are even more likely to be pro-government biased than NPR so I agree: SpaceX and Tesla should be labeled according to the government which supports them, there's no shame in that.
ta321099 4y ago
[dead]
- muyuu 4y ago
  i believe they are in the process of including more labels to State-affiliated and State-funded media
  - mcv 4y ago
    Yeah, but it does seem like they're doing so only in order to justify their decision on NPR. They gave NPR the label in response to a critical article from NPR, even while NPR was explicitly listed as an organisation this label didn't apply to. Since then, they've been scrambling to change rules and texts to justify a decision that was clearly made out of revenge.
    - muyuu 4y ago
      looks to me like they're expanding from the ones they know first it's strange to me that State-affiliation is seen as a pejorative, perhaps it's an American perspective - in Europe it's somewhere between a badge of honour or incidental information about the media that needs to be considered for context
      - mcv 4y ago
        It's a pejorative according to Twitter. According to their own definition, it applies to state-controlled media that don't have independent editorial control, and tweets with this label are not boosted the way other tweets can be.
        muyuu 4y ago
        editorial control being subject to private or to public interests is not a big difference Twitter only applies this label because it's valuable context
bagels 4y ago
Okay, by the same label, I mean "state affiliated" I think the "state affiliated media" could be applied to Twitter by the same standards, but for Tesla & SpaceX, just "state affiliated"

> Should Elon's account (or SpaceX or Telsa) have the same label because of their significant government funding? Are they a "media" company primarily dedicated to the practice of journalism?

ImPostingOnHN 4y ago

the account is media, and it's as state affiliated as NPR, if not moreso as for whether it's a media company, that's irrelevant and seems to be an attempt to move the goalposts

NoZebra120vClip 4y ago
It's not irrelevant. I think it's a useful distinction. All companies have PR departments (except, of course, Twitter, which only responds with poop emoji.) Company PR departments generally report on the company and things which directly affect the company. They issue press releases and they comment on litigation and they celebrate anniversaries. Journalism organizations and public information outlets don't merely report on themselves, they report on the world, or topics of interest to their advertisers or donors or governments or supporters. Therefore there's a wider range and there's a third-party nature to it. Journalists may be investigative, or sometimes they may just regurgitate press releases from various companies. From wide ranges of different types of various companies. Even if a news outlet reports only on dentistry, there's still a wide range of dental topics that are covered, not just Colgate and their toothpaste. So I agree; NPR should be properly labeled according to the government which supports them. So should PBS, right? There's no shame in that. Why don't Facebook and Google do it too? YouTube regularly slaps a label on government mouthpieces that I tune into there. It's important to be even-handed and label the Chinese and Russians the same as the Venezuelans and Germans and Irish and Catholics and Orthodox the same as the United States.
- ImPostingOnHN 4y ago
  I actually don't think it's a useful distinction, since the topic is media, not media companies. SpaceX's and Tesla's social media accounts are media, and they're both as state-affiliated, if not moreso, than NPR folks reading posts by Tesla and SpaceX should know that aside from elmu's history of disingenuousness and outright lying, such posts are even more likely to be pro-government biased than NPR so I agree: SpaceX and Tesla should be labeled according to the government which supports them, there's no shame in that.

ta321099 4y ago

[dead]

muyuu 4y ago
i believe they are in the process of including more labels to State-affiliated and State-funded media
- mcv 4y ago
  Yeah, but it does seem like they're doing so only in order to justify their decision on NPR. They gave NPR the label in response to a critical article from NPR, even while NPR was explicitly listed as an organisation this label didn't apply to. Since then, they've been scrambling to change rules and texts to justify a decision that was clearly made out of revenge.
  - muyuu 4y ago
    looks to me like they're expanding from the ones they know first it's strange to me that State-affiliation is seen as a pejorative, perhaps it's an American perspective - in Europe it's somewhere between a badge of honour or incidental information about the media that needs to be considered for context
    - mcv 4y ago
      It's a pejorative according to Twitter. According to their own definition, it applies to state-controlled media that don't have independent editorial control, and tweets with this label are not boosted the way other tweets can be.
      - muyuu 4y ago
        editorial control being subject to private or to public interests is not a big difference Twitter only applies this label because it's valuable context

bagels 4y ago

Okay, by the same label, I mean "state affiliated" I think the "state affiliated media" could be applied to Twitter by the same standards, but for Tesla & SpaceX, just "state affiliated"