Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt

Techdirt

from the the-writing-on-the-wall dept

This week, both our top comments on the insightful side come in response to another commenter’s attempt to defend Twitter labeling NPR as “state-affiliated media”. In first place, it’s an anonymous commenter pointing to the site’s own definition:

Going by Twitter 2.0’s updated definition (emphasis mine):

State-affiliated media is defined as outlets where the state exercises control over editorial content through financial resources, direct or indirect political pressures, and/or control over production and distribution.

If NPR receives too little money from the government for the gov to exercise “control over editorial content” then NPR isn’t state-affiliated media according to the definition that Elon’s Twitter is using as of April 5, 2023.

In second place, it’s Stephen T. Stone with a simple test:

You have to ask yourself two questions in this situation:

1. Does a significant amount of funding for a media group come from government funds?
2. Irrespective of the first question: Does the government exert editorial control of any kind over the output of said media group?

If the answer to both questions is “no” (as it is with NPR), the organization isn’t a state-controlled media outlet.

For editor’s choice on the insightful side, we start out with one more anonymous comment from that post, this time looking at another outlet that didn’t earn the label:

Arguably the BBC is MORE deserving of that label given the revolving door between its executives and the membership and donors of the current governing party here in the UK.

Next, it’s Thad with a good summary of the career arc of Matt Taibbi:

There was a time when his knee-jerk contrarianism looked like principle. He was on the right side of a number of issues, like the Iraq war and government surveillance.

He and Glenn Greenwald have followed a very similar arc. There was a time I admired both of them. I think they were probably always awful, and all they ever really cared about was getting attention. But 10-20 years ago, the statements they made to get attention tended to be ones I agreed with, and at the time I thought that meant they shared my values.

Over on the funny side, our first place winner is Stephen T. Stone making the obvious joke about Musk going to war with Substack:

Leopards, faces, etc.

In second place, it’s Who Cares with more thoughts on NPR:

OMG

I’m state affiliated since I get a (non US) government supplement. That means you cannot trust anything I say/write since it will be state propaganda.

To the readers here: Sorry being exposed as a government plant by that Dastardly Musk, if it weren’t for him, those kids and that dog I would have been able to keep feeding you my views.

For editor’s choice on the funny side, we’ve got a pair of comments from Toom1275. First, it’s a response to the appeals court that overturned the murder conviction of a cop who killed a suicidal man 11 seconds after entering his house, and specifically the ruling’s invocation of “the perspective of a reasonable police officer”:

So the appeals court has erred by making an impossible demand.

Finally, it’s a lovely quote related to Elon Musk’s ego-driven decision making:

“If there’s anything more important than my ego around here, I want it caught and shot now.”
– Zaphod Beeblebrox

…who incidentally presents himself as far smarter and more capable at his position than Musk.

That’s all for this week, folks!