3 ms·

OP is largely about Facebook which is genuinely terrible, very much unlike Twitter. I spend 1.5 hours a day on the Twitter/X app, follow over a thousand account

by blfr 3y ago

OP is largely about Facebook which is genuinely terrible, very much unlike Twitter. I spend 1.5 hours a day on the Twitter/X app, follow over a thousand accounts. However, none of them are the NRP/CNN/BBC/Economist-type old media slop. Twitter started with celebrities and journalists but today you can always find an independent voice or some niche group that has better info, smarter analysis, and hotter takes, all while not being boring. Everything a modern journalist is constitutionally incapable of. It's like the blogosphere of a decade ago. Muting these outlets makes the platform better for its users.

d3w4s9 3y ago
Good for you. Given the article links I see here, I think most HN users prefer the "old media" that abide by a set of ethic rules, have rigorous fact checking and have professional editing. I would rather see factually correct info that can be corroborated than "better info".
- Clubber 3y ago
  > I think most HN users prefer the "old media" that abide by a set of ethic rules, have rigorous fact checking and have professional editing. Why do people still believe this? https://effectiviology.com/knolls-law/ https://effectiviology.com/knolls-law/
  - d3w4s9 3y ago
    I didn't say everything in nytimes is "true" (whatever it means) according to that article, but I'll trust nytimes more than a random person on Twitter any day. Even better, I have subscriptions to multiple newspapers, some of which have opposite political positions, and you'll need to work pretty hard to say you have better sources than what I am reading every day. I read/watched a lot about the behind-the-scene stories of these media organizations, and I have faith in their methodology in verifying sources and checking all the details. They have hiccups, sometimes really bad ones, sure, but that doesn't mean alternatives sources are better.
    - Clubber 3y ago
      >you'll need to work pretty hard to say you have better sources than what I am reading every day. Is it some sort of competition? Honestly, you should really stop reading all of it. It's very manipulative. Stick to first hand accounts if you must.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
j_maffe 3y ago
Well, as long as you're being entertained with hotter takes...
manonthewall 3y ago
Most of the niche stuff I see on there is from psychos, conspiracists, and obvious propaganda bots. I do use it to follow more mainstream stuff, hobby stuff, coders, but it's fun to click on the firehouse feed Musk thinks I want to see occasionally. Anything that is in the news cycle that is parroted by the blue checks is 9/10 going to be totally unhinged conspiracy and Russian/Chinese disinfo bots.

by blfr 3y ago

d3w4s9 3y ago

Good for you. Given the article links I see here, I think most HN users prefer the "old media" that abide by a set of ethic rules, have rigorous fact checking and have professional editing. I would rather see factually correct info that can be corroborated than "better info".

Clubber 3y ago
> I think most HN users prefer the "old media" that abide by a set of ethic rules, have rigorous fact checking and have professional editing. Why do people still believe this? https://effectiviology.com/knolls-law/ https://effectiviology.com/knolls-law/
- d3w4s9 3y ago
  I didn't say everything in nytimes is "true" (whatever it means) according to that article, but I'll trust nytimes more than a random person on Twitter any day. Even better, I have subscriptions to multiple newspapers, some of which have opposite political positions, and you'll need to work pretty hard to say you have better sources than what I am reading every day. I read/watched a lot about the behind-the-scene stories of these media organizations, and I have faith in their methodology in verifying sources and checking all the details. They have hiccups, sometimes really bad ones, sure, but that doesn't mean alternatives sources are better.
  - Clubber 3y ago
    >you'll need to work pretty hard to say you have better sources than what I am reading every day. Is it some sort of competition? Honestly, you should really stop reading all of it. It's very manipulative. Stick to first hand accounts if you must.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

j_maffe 3y ago

Well, as long as you're being entertained with hotter takes...

manonthewall 3y ago

Most of the niche stuff I see on there is from psychos, conspiracists, and obvious propaganda bots. I do use it to follow more mainstream stuff, hobby stuff, coders, but it's fun to click on the firehouse feed Musk thinks I want to see occasionally. Anything that is in the news cycle that is parroted by the blue checks is 9/10 going to be totally unhinged conspiracy and Russian/Chinese disinfo bots.