Twitter Rebrand to 𝕏

[DarkFruitsRam7]

1 hour ago, Carl Sagan said:

You post a link to internet censorship and then advocate adding to it? Do you really not think all governments engage in propaganda, and it's useful to listen to a diversity of voices to better understand what is going on in the world? I've had fascinating conversations with academics who travel the globe for conferences etc, discussing how very differently the Ukraine war is reported in different countries. And how badly it's reported in the US and UK.

People should be able to listen and make up their own minds, rather than being told what to believe. As @maxjamposted, there was 60 Minutes doing an interview with Putin a few years ago, but the world is now too polarized and the legacy media is on one side of that divide, and wouldn't dream of doing the same thing nowadays. But it is what a good journalist should do. Fine you might not think Tucker is a good journalist, but maybe he'll lead the way for a restoration of journalistic standards when someone else also goes out and does an interview?

Again, this isn't journalism. It will be a puff piece.

I learned years ago not to spend time arguing on the internet though, so I'll leave it there.

[Archied]

3 hours ago, DarkFruitsRam7 said:

Controls what people see, as you say. Also in charge of getting us to Mars, and he’s behind Neuralink, which is putting chips in people’s brains. He also owns Starlink, which has already become relevant in the Russia-Ukraine war: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starlink_in_the_Russo-Ukrainian_War#:~:text=SpaceX CEO Elon Musk has,school instead of drone strikes.

You only have to watch Sunak’s fawning interview with him last year to see where the balance of power lies between Musk and the British Prime Minister, for example.

Your sounding like a conspiracy theorist 😂

[Mucker1884]

1 hour ago, DarkFruitsRam7 said:

...Hypothetical question: would you have advocated interviewing Hitler during the Second World War and broadcasting it on the radio?

*Wireless

[Alph]

1 hour ago, DarkFruitsRam7 said:

The point of my original post, which I kind of got lost on, isn't that the big problem is Putin being interviewed. It's the fact that I fear this is the beginning (or midpoint) of Musk becoming a shill for anyone who opposes what he deems "the deep state", who are apparently turning people gay to get more people to vote for Biden.

Hypothetical question: would you have advocated interviewing Hitler during the Second World War and broadcasting it on the radio?

Ah ok. Got ya on the first point. 

The second bit.... Weirdly, yeah. I mean I'm poorly educated on WW2 so it would probably be better to keep it on some of the current candidates for historical villains. 

I understand your point is the spreading of dangerous propaganda. 

But there's something to be said of taking a genuine concern and addressing it and kind of appeasing it. So in the 30's (poor WW2 knowledge apology) I think Hitler rose to power on the promise to break free of the economic squeeze on Germany? Germany had been forced to surrender colonies and pay war reparations. Perhaps at this point a threat was obvious and steps could have been taken to avoid what came next. Is there a way we could have stopped him tapping into people's insecurities and gaining such support? Or a way to give him enough rope to hang himself. 

Different time though. 

But I think you see it now. So Putin will come on and talk about NATO expansion, national security, attacks on Russians in East Ukraine from groups like Azov, American colonialism etc. Some of it, in my opinion, will show that there were times when we could made concessions. Then he will go on to justify why he's had to kill so many Ukrainians and send Russians to die. This is where we point out that he's actually isolated Russia from Europe more than ever and countries want to be fast tracked into NATO. So your whole national security argument for "special military operation" is ridiculous. 

I hope I got across what I mean. 

You just look at say Israel/Palestine. Who provides the best argument for Israeli defence? Netenyahu? No, he provides the best argument for Hamas. The best argument for Israeli defence comes from the Palestinian threat. 

I don't like the idea that we can ignore the concerns of a group or nation etc based on the theory that they're inherently evil. Even if we believe it. It feeds their argument. It kind of empowers them? 

But yeah, letting Hitler tell everybody that Jews are to be eradicated on Radio... So I do get you. Just it's also not a problem that goes away by ignoring it. So... Yeah. That's why I asked what your problem with a Putin interview might be. Not so I could tell you your wrong, I don't know if I agree with it or not. 

[Eddie]

Hmmmmmm

[Crewton]

56 minutes ago, Eddie said:

Hmmmmmm

Layers of irony upon layers of irony......

[ariotofmyown]

10 hours ago, Carl Sagan said:

I'm curious what you think is wrong with Tucker interviewing Putin. And it being broadcast live and unedited on Twitter. What brilliant transparency. Carlson has been by far the most watched political commentator in America, yet lost his voice when dumped by the legacy media.

In this age of new media, he can broadcast via his own channel, but the question is also one of discoverability. Hence those broadcasts also going out on Twitter (hence the watermark to distinguish you're viewing there rather than on his personal channel). The ratings for these pieces are much higher than the political commentary across all legacy news channels in America combined.

If it weren't for Musk, no one would be able to hear Tucker. Are you deciding on behalf of the very many tens of millions who tune in, that they shouldn't be able to? Surely he has a right to be heard?

You spent so long on that reply that you totally forgot to mention about Musk agreeing that the deep state are turns kids in LBGTQ and that the Dems have started a civil war!

It worked though, the thread then moved into a valid debate about who should or shouldn't be interviewed.  

I loved this bit though: "Carlson has been by far the most watched political commentator in America, yet lost his voice when dumped by the legacy media."

He was dumped by Fox News! About the same time they paid out millions to the voting company whom they lied about fixing the election. And Carlson now interviews Putin on a platform ran by a lunactic who laughably thinks the deep state is turning kids gay and who also runs a communications network that can impact on warfare between two European countries!

It's been a bad couple of years to have Musk as your hero. What would he have to do for you to even slightly question your undying support of him? Call a guy who rescues kids from a cave a child abuser? Promote wild, unsubstaniated theories that politician's families attacked at home were just the victims of spurned gay lovers, not the victims of lunatics beliving the constant stream of garbage pumped out by the likes of Fox News/Musk?

 

[uttoxram75]

11 hours ago, Carl Sagan said:

I'm curious what you think is wrong with Tucker interviewing Putin. And it being broadcast live and unedited on Twitter. What brilliant transparency. Carlson has been by far the most watched political commentator in America, yet lost his voice when dumped by the legacy media.

In this age of new media, he can broadcast via his own channel, but the question is also one of discoverability. Hence those broadcasts also going out on Twitter (hence the watermark to distinguish you're viewing there rather than on his personal channel). The ratings for these pieces are much higher than the political commentary across all legacy news channels in America combined.

If it weren't for Musk, no one would be able to hear Tucker. Are you deciding on behalf of the very many tens of millions who tune in, that they shouldn't be able to? Surely he has a right to be heard?

If Tucker was a threat to the rulers he wouldn't be heard, The fact that he is always broadcast shows he's a member of the club.

[Highgate]

9 hours ago, Carl Sagan said:

People should be able to listen and make up their own minds, rather than being told what to believe. As @maxjamposted, there was 60 Minutes doing an interview with Putin a few years ago, but the world is now too polarized and the legacy media is on one side of that divide, and wouldn't dream of doing the same thing nowadays. But it is what a good journalist should do. Fine you might not think Tucker is a good journalist, but maybe he'll lead the way for a restoration of journalistic standards when someone else also goes out and does an interview?

It's not just that Tucker Carlson isn't a good journalist, he is a truly appalling...actually I hesitate to use the term journalist...TV personality or whatever he is.  

This is a man who helped cost his own employers, Fox News, nearly $800million dollars, for constantly repeating false conspiracies about Dominion voting machines. Lies that's his own text messages proved that he didn't believe.  Carlson was singled out in particular in the lawsuit for his 'knowing and reckless disregard of the truth'. 

Surely, nobody could listen to Carlson describe the Jan 6th as peaceful protests and consider him a journalist of any standing. In fact, the Kremlin have chosen Putin's interviewer well as Tucker has repeatedly dismissed criticisms of Putin and has often parroted Kremlin propaganda in relation to the invasion of Ukraine.  Given that the interviewee is an inveterate liar himself, whose notion of the truth is merely what serves his and Russia's interest (or more correctly what he thinks is in Russia's interest), I really don't think we will learn much of value from this dialogue. 

I'm not against the interview in principle or the broadcasting of it, but anyone hoping that Carlson interviewing Putin will restore journalistic standards will be disappointed to say the least. 

 

[Crewton]

He's Tony Stark-Raving-Bonkers

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2023/08/28/elon-musks-shadow-rule

[GboroRam]

Tucker Carlson is not a journalist. He was a presenter on an entertainment show. Remember always, Fox News told so many lies they had to self classify as entertainment instead of news. 

[Archied]

5 hours ago, GboroRam said:

Tucker Carlson is not a journalist. He was a presenter on an entertainment show. Remember always, Fox News told so many lies they had to self classify as entertainment instead of news. 

There must be a place for him with the bbc then😂,,,, has he got any sex scandal skeletons in the cupboard?

[Day]

He’s taming the bots. I’ve had to reopen an X account just to follow the Derby accounts. Disappointingly Threads doesn’t appear to appeal to the football outlets.

Anyhow, I’ve not made a single post, liked a post, reposted a post. Nothing. Just followed 55 accounts.

If I have this many bots already, I think it tells you a lot about how many followers Elon really has. 

[Wolfie20]

I'm beginning to feel on my own. I don't care a jot about Twotter, Snap-whotsit, Tick-Tack-Toe or whatever - am I missing out?

[Gaspode]

10 minutes ago, David said:

He’s taming the bots. I’ve had to reopen an X account just to follow the Derby accounts. Disappointingly Threads doesn’t appear to appeal to the football outlets.

Anyhow, I’ve not made a single post, liked a post, reposted a post. Nothing. Just followed 55 accounts.

If I have this many bots already, I think it tells you a lot about how many followers Elon really has. 

Are we really supposed to believe that you didn't take a quick peek at Olivia Bumpers?

[Day]

10 minutes ago, Wolfie20 said:

I'm beginning to feel on my own. I don't care a jot about Twotter, Snap-whotsit, Tick-Tack-Toe or whatever - am I missing out?

Twitter, probably the best of the bad bunch still for the latest news and football.

Facebook, the family zone where you get nothing but memories being shared or competitions entered.

Snapchat, for single teenagers and a place for OnlyFans content creators to avoid the tax man.

Instagram, images and videos, been ruined by turning it into a shopping site where you follow content creators, not just seeing what your mates are up to.

TikTok, attention seekers and gullible kids taking on life endangering challengers. The worst of the lot.

Threads, had promise to be the new Twitter, launched with missing key features and limited countries, subsequent releases over what the site is for shows it’s just another follow these content creators.

[Ram-Alf]

9 minutes ago, Wolfie20 said:

I'm beginning to feel on my own. I don't care a jot about Twotter, Snap-whotsit, Tick-Tack-Toe or whatever - am I missing out?

You're not alone Wolfie same here...but, A few months ago I could click on a link posted here from twixxter and watch goals from DCFC, Now when I click on a twixxter link on here I get a  has the secret police blocked me 😬

 

[Archied]

12 minutes ago, Wolfie20 said:

I'm beginning to feel on my own. I don't care a jot about Twotter, Snap-whotsit, Tick-Tack-Toe or whatever - am I missing out?

You are not alone my friend 🤷🏻‍♂️

[Day]

5 minutes ago, Ram-Alf said:

You're not alone Wolfie same here...but, A few months ago I could click on a link posted here from twixxter and watch goals from DCFC, Now when I click on a twixxter link on here I get a  has the secret police blocked me 😬

 

What’s the username?

It’s possible they have closed their account, or protected their account so you have to request to follow and see their content.

Or now if it’s a popular account, they would have the opportunity to stick content behind a paywall.

[Wolfie20]

39 minutes ago, David said:

Twitter, probably the best of the bad bunch still for the latest news and football.

Facebook, the family zone where you get nothing but memories being shared or competitions entered.

Snapchat, for single teenagers and a place for OnlyFans content creators to avoid the tax man.

Instagram, images and videos, been ruined by turning it into a shopping site where you follow content creators, not just seeing what your mates are up to.

TikTok, attention seekers and gullible kids taking on life endangering challengers. The worst of the lot.

Threads, had promise to be the new Twitter, launched with missing key features and limited countries, subsequent releases over what the site is for shows it’s just another follow these content creators.

So no, I'm not. Phew that's good to know.