Correction: Specifically Curated by the NYT.
Just so everyone understands, the images in the New York Times article about “radicalization” on YouTube reflect a “sampling” of the young man’s multi-year viewing history, I assume specifically chosen by the NYT. No objective methodology that I can see. So activism IMO.
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Does anyone except the far left even read the NYT to begin with? Seems like they just publish into an echo chamber to me...
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable
-
-
Activism period - totally disgusting even for them
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable
-
-
it's garbage fear mongering. the MSM can't compete with independent creators so they spin, spread lies and proffer misinformation
#EnemyOfThePeople - 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
You couldn't possibly have expected objective journalism from the NYTimes, Stefan? That anyone takes them seriously these days is a miracle.
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable
- 1 more reply
-
-
-
In other words, NYT typed “burning frogs” into the YouTube search field and was stunned to see an Internet dedicated to the destruction of amphibians.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Not a single one of those pictures was accidental. Every single one was deliberate.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable
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.