This interview with the NY Times' executive editor is the establishment media equivalent of Zuckerberg's widely-panned Georgetown speech. Both spend most of their time justifying past decisions while missing the big picture point on how 2016 has shifted the information ecosystem.https://twitter.com/mathewi/status/1223650901929484288 …
-
-
Unfortunately, the podcast doesn't address another disastrous story from the last days of the campaign, where the Times was possibly played by pro-Trump leakers. I can't believe this story still doesn't have an editor's note at the bottom.https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/01/us/politics/fbi-russia-election-donald-trump.html …
Prikaži ovu nit -
It is unfortunate that the NY Times has not set good standards for the rest of the industry on how to *not* becoming an unwitting part of a foreign influence campaign. Hopefully the
@washingtonpost does a retrospective with a bit more humility and some concrete recommendations.Prikaži ovu nit -
cc
@karaswisher Something for us to discussion on stage at Michigan!https://twitter.com/UMKnightWallace/status/1222648323506462720 …Prikaži ovu nit -
Ugh, typos. I guess I need an executive editor.
Prikaži ovu nit -
Another way to sum up: Baquet and Zuckerberg are both focused on the equities surrounding each individual decision on what to publish or moderate without properly considering the big picture of how the information environment is being professionally manipulated.
Prikaži ovu nit -
Zuck is focused on the free speech rights of individuals. Baquet on the critical role of journalism. Both men are right about the importance of these considerations, but they also need frameworks that take into account that our cherished freedoms are being used against us.
Prikaži ovu nit
Kraj razgovora
Novi razgovor -
Čini se da učitavanje traje već neko vrijeme.
Twitter je možda preopterećen ili ima kratkotrajnih poteškoća u radu. Pokušajte ponovno ili potražite dodatne informacije u odjeljku Status Twittera.