“It is just over,” journalist @caseynewton told The Post.
“If you wouldn’t join Gab, or Parler, or Truth Social, there’s no reason you should be on X. I think it’s time for journalists and publishers, in particular, to acknowledge the new reality and to get the heck off that website.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/11/19/antisemiticism-interent-elon-musk-israwl-war/
@taylorlorenz this is foolish.
If journalists can report on the platform and find readers there then they should. That's their job.
This take is like a doctor refusing to serve an accident site because he doesn't like the type of people who frequent that venue.
No, X is a place where journalists can effectively publish their work. If they are avoiding the platform purely because they don't like the way it looks then they are not doing their jobs, they are letting bias override their work.
@volkris @taylorlorenz @caseynewton The original post didn’t say “avoid X”, it said “treat it like parlor”.
Which seems right. If you have reporting that needs input from the radical right or that you believe is valuable to advertise to the radical right, then parlor is a good place to do that. X is increasingly the same.
@birwin but again that overlooks the role of journalism in putting out solid information through mass communication.
You say needs input from the radical right, but reporting is not about getting input. And posting reports to Twitter can inform that audience, which is the fundamental task of journalism.
It has nothing to do with getting input.
So X represents an audience for good information, I imagine a much larger audience than parlor but I don't care to check, but heck, yeah post on both!
Fine, treat them the same, seek to inform both audiences.
Sounds good to me.
