Wait what? Facebook "Oversight Board" is giving "embargoed" access of its *full* decisions to individual writers? Like a single person? Is that so? No. Not okay. (Not naming the person because it doesn't mean she did something wrong). But, no, no, no. We aren't their PR agents.
-
Show this thread
-
-
Replying to @mathewi
Unless it's almost everyone (i.e. journalists/writers who write on this topic) that group is being "groomed" and this should be treated like the terrible PR exercise it is. Incentives matter, and this is basically how independent thinking is destroyed. FB did this with data, too.
2 replies 6 retweets 86 likes -
Replying to @zeynep
I understand your point, and agree, but this is how Facebook operates and has operated even with journalists. And not just them, but virtually every tech company. Some get embargoes and others don't. Playing favorites is systemic.
2 replies 1 retweet 10 likes -
First, has anyone found out how many people did get embargoed release? Second, let's look at all the publications that accept embargoes, namely every newspaper alive.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @jeffjarvis @mathewi
Yes and look what access journalism has done to political reporting. I'm okay if the embargo is offered to everyone. If that's the case, I tweeted, and people would come forward and say I got it too. Plus how about avoiding journalism's worst habits.
1 reply 0 retweets 7 likes -
Fwiw- Facebook’s embargoes usually go to a dozen+ publications. The only time that isn’t the case is when a specific journalist(s) finds something on their own, brings it to FB, and then holds off on publication until FB can take action (thinking of
@clarissaward).2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Thanks, Sheera. How often in a month would you say your department gets embargoed releases?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @jeffjarvis @sheeraf and
The real question is who *doesn't* get them. I'd like some clarity in this case.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
That's a very different question. I will say again that if the OB wanted to avoid tough critics, they would not have given
@evelyndouek the advance. I have witnessed her being their toughest questioner.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
You're a mind-reader of Oversight Board *and* you have decided who's the toughest critic? I think what's happening is pretty plain to see, and if it was broad access, I'm good. If not, it's not okay. I'm not playing mind-reader games or rating people. I'll leave it here.
-
-
I was one of scores of people in more than one audio press conference and I heard Evelyn's questions and, yes, I judge that they were the toughest by far. I'm not mind-reading, I'm expressing a judgment based on what I witnessed.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @jeffjarvis @sheeraf and
Yes you are. It's not your or their place to decree who the toughest critic may be, and it's not your place to tell us what the Oversight Board was thinking in such narrow selective access (if that's the case) unless you are representing them.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes - Show replies
New conversation -
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.