State-Affiliated Media Debate
The cluster discusses Twitter's policy on labeling state-affiliated or government-funded media outlets like BBC and NPR, debating distinctions between funding, editorial independence, state control, and potential propaganda biases.
Activity Over Time
Top Contributors
Keywords
Sample Comments
there are state-sponsered media like BBC, etc.
You know that goverents frequently distribute their propaganda through media outlets that are not state owned, right?
All media/news organisations have an agenda, but state sponsored ones are especially dangerous.BBC News is a government mouthpiece, I would rather the UK government didn't have a means to distribute their propaganda directly to my TV or phone or computer under the guise of a "friendly national broadcaster".
Not if the media are state controlled.
You should look into their origin story if you want an answer. And no, Govt-Funded is also not fair absent an indication of editorial control. The BBC in the UK, the NOS in NL, NPR in the United States, and so on are all official channels but they also have their own editorial staff and only in very rare cases does the government directly intervene in the production (and usually simultaneously on other channels as well). So this is simply Elon playing stupid games, which he seems to be ve
What "government-funded media" are you talking about?
this is a state controlled media outlet?
"This policy will not apply to taxpayer-funded entities, including independent public broadcasters" and "This policy will apply to news media entities that are either financially or editorially controlled by the state" seem a bit contradictory to me: state media and taxpayer-funded entity are exactly the same! They can be independant as much as the politics allowed them to be. Most of the time, the people working there for some times know when to shut up and look elsewhere to
Thats expected. In functioning democracies state media is run for the purpose not profit. It doesnt have the corrupting influence of political money. PBS in the US could be so much better. Just look at what BBC is able to do in the UK.
Because the "government funded media" was a last minute save, the original "state affiliated media" is a false claim. Surely you grasp the difference between the two labels? The latter has corporate and editorial control in case you were unaware.