2 ms·
I’ve posted a clear article outlining places the “Twitter files” were more noise than signal. Just saying “no” and then pointing at the entirety of the document
by jmye 3y ago
I’ve posted a clear article outlining places the “Twitter files” were more noise than signal. Just saying “no” and then pointing at the entirety of the documents is an absurd response. And that’s without account for the unhinged rant that had little to do with anything I’ve said or posted.
- harry8 3y agonymag article is really embarrassing. Reminded me of this: https://www.mediaite.com/online/the-twenty-seven-most-embarrassing-reactions-to-taibbi-thread-about-twitter-censoring-hunter-biden-tweets/ https://www.mediaite.com/online/the-twenty-seven-most-embarr... Zero quotes from Taibbi's article. Zero accurate paraphrasing of any Taibbi argument or claim. Zero claim of factual error with details. Zero links to the original. Zero mention of Shellenberger or /any/ of the other journalists involved. Just so appallingly bad! It's like Aunt June reporting to you what her sewing circle thinks about what they say is being said in Shelbyville and why they are so wrong to hate Jebediah Springfield. How did you go reading just /one/ of the original articles with its source docs? Did you try it? Did /you/ find a problem in the reporting Taibbi actually /did/ in that article or indeed any other? Did you find it a very different experience reading it to reading about it places like "nymag?" I really did. And first amendment violations are a story and not nothing.