Hi @oliverdarcy! I wanted to make sure you saw this article about the Huffington Post publishing a pro-Epstein article.
I look forward to CNN’s coverage!https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/21/business/media/jeffrey-epstein-media.amp.html …
-
Don’t forget to mention that in 2013
@HuffPost was an open platform that allowed people to post without editorial approval. Seems rather relevant here.
-
-
NYT: HuffPost discontinued the model of allowing outside writers to post freely last year. Before the system ended, contributors “could post their content with no editorial review,” HuffPost said in a statement. Its 2017 article on Mr. Epstein appeared under the former setup."
-
Seems shady. How can you trust a media outlet that used that model for 99% of its time?
-
Unless you want to consider only the comments Hannity and Limbaugh speak themselves, like the articles written by
@HuffPost staff, as the words of the publisher/show host and the rest is unaffiliated comments from the audience. -
What? Please clarify, you lost me here
-
People who post on open blog platforms are the same as people who call into radio talk shows. They are expressing their own opinions and not the opinions of the host or publisher.
-
Gotcha, thanks
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
From the NYT article you cite: "The articles in praise of Mr. Epstein came about partly because of an online publishing model adopted by some news organizations that relied on outside contributors who often wrote for little or no pay, with little or no input from editors."
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
So my point stands... attributing the article to
@HuffPost is like attributing what a caller says on Rush Limbaugh's show to Rush, himself.Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.