4 ms·

What's supposed to be so different about X versus even Twitter itself, or all other social media and the internet generally? Speaking of which, who is more dis

What's supposed to be so different about X versus even Twitter itself, or all other social media and the internet generally? Speaking of which, who is more disliked, Zuckerberg or Elon?

scarab92 2y ago
The Guardian exclusively publishes negative stories about X. When there is a problem, it’s rarely exclusive to X. When there isn’t, the journalists go trawling for random low engagement tweets and pretend those anecdotes are evidence of a systemic problem. It’s hard to see their actions as anything but a campaign of hit pieces. I’m not sure if they are doing this to generate outrage bait, if the journalists have personal vendettas against Musk, or if it’s simply a matter of traditional media feeling threatened by social media. It’s a good reminder that in the real world things are rarely exclusively good or exclusively bad, and if a media outlet portrays things that way, then that media outlet is trying to mislead you.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- defrost 2y ago
  > or if it’s simply a matter of traditional media feeling threatened by social media. The problem with that theory is that pre-Musk Twitter was loved by journo's across the globe .. it was the place to break news and get first hand reactions, it was a place where tick-marks were "earned" by being that actual person claimed and having a verified job at (say) Times of London | Some Energy Company | etc. These days there are fewer and fewer working journo's, anyone with $$'s can buy a gold mark, the zazz of black twitter has retreated, etc. It was never my thing but as an outside observer the shine has gone and journo's are bitter about X-itter as many (not all) miss the old version.
  - kreetx 2y ago
    Wasn't it loved by a certain subset of journalists though?
    - defrost 2y ago
      I'd be more inclined to run with a small hold out sub section hated "old Twitter" .. and probably hate new twitter. There was a long standing distaste for sourcing news from twitter, which is understandable, but large chunks of old media were quite happy to use twitter to reach out to contacts (and DM behind the public eye), to guage reactions, and network. There are (were) some pretty good network visualisation clouds that I saw in years past that showed how twitter really developed some deep across thhe globe communication connections. A lot of that early fun and novelty has fallen away, not totally due to Musk, like MySpace, Facebook, Reddit, et al social networks become staid and passe.
  - 082349872349872 2y ago
    criticism from nearly a decade ago: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UKftOH54iNU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UKftOH54iNU
    - defrost 2y ago
      With fewer feathers¹; see Sleaford Mods Tweet Tweet Tweet² & Blog Maggot³ ¹ https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/42889/hope-is-the-thing-with-feathers-314 https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/42889/hope-is-the-thi... ² https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVVAYqP4Abs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVVAYqP4Abs ³ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K8p_IY4EGaw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K8p_IY4EGaw
      - 082349872349872 2y ago
        Biggy Pop listening to the Mods is yet another example of feathers-over-the-beak chuffed.
- rsynnott 2y ago
  ... I mean, the Guardian has regularly publishes negative stories about Facebook, to the point that I remember people accusing it of having a vendetta against Facebook during the Cambridge Analytica thing. Also Youtube, and TikTok. There are your major social networks. I'm not aware of it having published negative stories about LinkedIn, presumably because LinkedIn is too boring to care about.

What's supposed to be so different about X versus even Twitter itself, or all other social media and the internet generally? Speaking of which, who is more disliked, Zuckerberg or Elon?

scarab92 2y ago

The Guardian exclusively publishes negative stories about X. When there is a problem, it’s rarely exclusive to X. When there isn’t, the journalists go trawling for random low engagement tweets and pretend those anecdotes are evidence of a systemic problem. It’s hard to see their actions as anything but a campaign of hit pieces. I’m not sure if they are doing this to generate outrage bait, if the journalists have personal vendettas against Musk, or if it’s simply a matter of traditional media feeling threatened by social media. It’s a good reminder that in the real world things are rarely exclusively good or exclusively bad, and if a media outlet portrays things that way, then that media outlet is trying to mislead you.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
defrost 2y ago
> or if it’s simply a matter of traditional media feeling threatened by social media. The problem with that theory is that pre-Musk Twitter was loved by journo's across the globe .. it was the place to break news and get first hand reactions, it was a place where tick-marks were "earned" by being that actual person claimed and having a verified job at (say) Times of London | Some Energy Company | etc. These days there are fewer and fewer working journo's, anyone with $$'s can buy a gold mark, the zazz of black twitter has retreated, etc. It was never my thing but as an outside observer the shine has gone and journo's are bitter about X-itter as many (not all) miss the old version.
- kreetx 2y ago
  Wasn't it loved by a certain subset of journalists though?
  - defrost 2y ago
    I'd be more inclined to run with a small hold out sub section hated "old Twitter" .. and probably hate new twitter. There was a long standing distaste for sourcing news from twitter, which is understandable, but large chunks of old media were quite happy to use twitter to reach out to contacts (and DM behind the public eye), to guage reactions, and network. There are (were) some pretty good network visualisation clouds that I saw in years past that showed how twitter really developed some deep across thhe globe communication connections. A lot of that early fun and novelty has fallen away, not totally due to Musk, like MySpace, Facebook, Reddit, et al social networks become staid and passe.
- 082349872349872 2y ago
  criticism from nearly a decade ago: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UKftOH54iNU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UKftOH54iNU
  - defrost 2y ago
    With fewer feathers¹; see Sleaford Mods Tweet Tweet Tweet² & Blog Maggot³ ¹ https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/42889/hope-is-the-thing-with-feathers-314 https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/42889/hope-is-the-thi... ² https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVVAYqP4Abs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVVAYqP4Abs ³ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K8p_IY4EGaw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K8p_IY4EGaw
    - 082349872349872 2y ago
      Biggy Pop listening to the Mods is yet another example of feathers-over-the-beak chuffed.
rsynnott 2y ago
... I mean, the Guardian has regularly publishes negative stories about Facebook, to the point that I remember people accusing it of having a vendetta against Facebook during the Cambridge Analytica thing. Also Youtube, and TikTok. There are your major social networks. I'm not aware of it having published negative stories about LinkedIn, presumably because LinkedIn is too boring to care about.