4 ms·

I’m gonna take your words at face value and ask you a question: what do you gain in gettin access to that news a few minutes in advance?

blfr 2y ago
First, it was hours. Second, I'm there more for the tpot/schizo/alternative content. Most importantly though, it's not just a couple hours of difference, but the content is different: raw, with live comments (from the people you follow pulled up), memes, etc. It's the vibe you used to find on usenet and then blogosphere.
- manuelmoreale 2y ago
  Ok so first it was a matter of timing. Now it's become a matter of vibes and type of content. I get what you're saying, don't get me wrong, I just don't think a site where news are commented by randos mixed with memes and trolls is an important site we have to bend over backwards to preserve. But maybe that's just me.
- jrflowers 2y ago
  What is schizo content
  - felixgallo 2y ago
    Twitter
    - jrflowers 2y ago
      Ok what is tpot content then? I genuinely have no idea what they meant by that
      - manuelmoreale 2y ago
        Few links for you: TPOT: https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/subcultures/tpot-postrat https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/subcultures/tpot-postrat SCHIZO: https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/schizoposting https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/schizoposting
        jrflowers 2y ago
        Wow, there really are so many words for 4chan
plonk 2y ago
Other media is frustrating because it's always heavily filtered, has an agenda, and always talks like a PR release. It's like they're trying to keep some image of a respectable paper and so have to write in that stupid title - subtitle that repeats the title - first paragraph that repeats the subtitle - 30 paragraphs in complete disorder, half of which are a waste of time format Edit: someone on Twitter obviously also has an agenda, but it's not hidden behind a supposedly impartial image (NYT, etc.), it's just some guy with known credentials posting opinions
- manuelmoreale 2y ago
  Here's the thing, I agree. But also, you do know that the various news sites have an agenda. It's a fact. And the way you work around it is by reading from multiple sources that have different agendas and form your own opinion based on that. The random Twitter user though? Who the fuck knows. He might be in just for the lols. Maybe they're just bored. Maybe they're actually knowledgeable. You just don't know.
  - brigandish 2y ago
    That was a good strategy before sites like Twitter existed. Now, I can watch live feeds and info coming in without any journalists filtering it for me, or actually have them adding info while I consume primary sources. For example, several times in my life I happen to have caught a live stream that was reported on wildly inaccurately by legacy news media. I happened to watch, for example, the "Covington kids"[0] stream because it was trending on Twitter that day. Knowledge of that reporting travesty should be enough to shake anyone from experiencing the Gell-Mann amnesia effect, and wouldn't have been dispelled by reading several news sites because just so many were involved. Frankly, it was a disgusting and irresponsible response by said journalists and organisations and should lead people to stop reading those publications in their entirety. That's not the only example, but the idea that powerful "truth seeking" organisations should try and destroy the lives of children because of an agenda and a MAGA hat is an indictment of those organisations. It led to death threats against children. I'm happy with choosing my own sources of trust, thanks, and it won't be to read from sources that do that kind of thing. I have a thing called basic morality, and encouraging violence against children is a line I'm not willing to cross. YMMV. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Lincoln_Memorial_confrontation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Lincoln_Memorial_confront... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Crichton#Gell-Mann_amnesia_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Crichton#Gell-Mann_amn...
rinze 2y ago
He can share them before you do and get more likes.
nwhnwh 2y ago
It is not just speed. The media don't show you everything and almost all of them are highly selective.
- manuelmoreale 2y ago
  Twitter also doesn't show me everything, and content is algorithmically curated. And nothing is vetted. So why's that any better? Also, everything? Everything what? "The media" doesn't show me everything for obvious reasons. You can't digest everything. Because this is how "everything" looks like: https://firesky.tv https://firesky.tv
  - nwhnwh 2y ago
    I didn't mean everything literally.
    - manuelmoreale 2y ago
      Well if you didn’t mean that literally then I don’t see the point of your argument. Because then both don’t show you everything and both are selective in what they show you. It’s just a different model and a different set of incentives.

blfr 2y ago

First, it was hours. Second, I'm there more for the tpot/schizo/alternative content. Most importantly though, it's not just a couple hours of difference, but the content is different: raw, with live comments (from the people you follow pulled up), memes, etc. It's the vibe you used to find on usenet and then blogosphere.

manuelmoreale 2y ago
Ok so first it was a matter of timing. Now it's become a matter of vibes and type of content. I get what you're saying, don't get me wrong, I just don't think a site where news are commented by randos mixed with memes and trolls is an important site we have to bend over backwards to preserve. But maybe that's just me.
jrflowers 2y ago
What is schizo content
- felixgallo 2y ago
  Twitter
  - jrflowers 2y ago
    Ok what is tpot content then? I genuinely have no idea what they meant by that
    - manuelmoreale 2y ago
      Few links for you: TPOT: https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/subcultures/tpot-postrat https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/subcultures/tpot-postrat SCHIZO: https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/schizoposting https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/schizoposting
      - jrflowers 2y ago
        Wow, there really are so many words for 4chan

plonk 2y ago

Other media is frustrating because it's always heavily filtered, has an agenda, and always talks like a PR release. It's like they're trying to keep some image of a respectable paper and so have to write in that stupid title - subtitle that repeats the title - first paragraph that repeats the subtitle - 30 paragraphs in complete disorder, half of which are a waste of time format Edit: someone on Twitter obviously also has an agenda, but it's not hidden behind a supposedly impartial image (NYT, etc.), it's just some guy with known credentials posting opinions

manuelmoreale 2y ago
Here's the thing, I agree. But also, you do know that the various news sites have an agenda. It's a fact. And the way you work around it is by reading from multiple sources that have different agendas and form your own opinion based on that. The random Twitter user though? Who the fuck knows. He might be in just for the lols. Maybe they're just bored. Maybe they're actually knowledgeable. You just don't know.
- brigandish 2y ago
  That was a good strategy before sites like Twitter existed. Now, I can watch live feeds and info coming in without any journalists filtering it for me, or actually have them adding info while I consume primary sources. For example, several times in my life I happen to have caught a live stream that was reported on wildly inaccurately by legacy news media. I happened to watch, for example, the "Covington kids"[0] stream because it was trending on Twitter that day. Knowledge of that reporting travesty should be enough to shake anyone from experiencing the Gell-Mann amnesia effect, and wouldn't have been dispelled by reading several news sites because just so many were involved. Frankly, it was a disgusting and irresponsible response by said journalists and organisations and should lead people to stop reading those publications in their entirety. That's not the only example, but the idea that powerful "truth seeking" organisations should try and destroy the lives of children because of an agenda and a MAGA hat is an indictment of those organisations. It led to death threats against children. I'm happy with choosing my own sources of trust, thanks, and it won't be to read from sources that do that kind of thing. I have a thing called basic morality, and encouraging violence against children is a line I'm not willing to cross. YMMV. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Lincoln_Memorial_confrontation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Lincoln_Memorial_confront... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Crichton#Gell-Mann_amnesia_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Crichton#Gell-Mann_amn...

rinze 2y ago

He can share them before you do and get more likes.

nwhnwh 2y ago

It is not just speed. The media don't show you everything and almost all of them are highly selective.

manuelmoreale 2y ago
Twitter also doesn't show me everything, and content is algorithmically curated. And nothing is vetted. So why's that any better? Also, everything? Everything what? "The media" doesn't show me everything for obvious reasons. You can't digest everything. Because this is how "everything" looks like: https://firesky.tv https://firesky.tv
- nwhnwh 2y ago
  I didn't mean everything literally.
  - manuelmoreale 2y ago
    Well if you didn’t mean that literally then I don’t see the point of your argument. Because then both don’t show you everything and both are selective in what they show you. It’s just a different model and a different set of incentives.