Culture NPR quits Twitter after being falsely labeled as 'state-affiliated media' - Cope seethe dilate

1681313933278.png

NPR will no longer post fresh content to its 52 official Twitter feeds, becoming the first major news organization to go silent on the social media platform. In explaining its decision, NPR cited Twitter's decision to first label the network "state-affiliated media," the same term it uses for propaganda outlets in Russia, China and other autocratic countries.

The decision by Twitter last week took the public radio network off guard. When queried by NPR tech reporter Bobby Allyn, Twitter owner Elon Musk asked how NPR functioned. Musk allowed that he might have gotten it wrong.

Twitter then revised its label on NPR's account to "government-funded media." The news organization says that is inaccurate and misleading, given that NPR is a private, nonprofit company with editorial independence. It receives less than 1 percent of its $300 million annual budget from the federally funded Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

By going silent on Twitter, NPR's chief executive says the network is protecting its credibility and its ability to produce journalism without "a shadow of negativity."

"The downside, whatever the downside, doesn't change that fact," NPR CEO John Lansing said in an interview. "I would never have our content go anywhere that would risk our credibility."

In a BBC interview posted online Wednesday, Musk suggested he may further change the label to "publicly funded." His words did not sway NPR's decision makers. Even if Twitter were to drop the designation altogether, Lansing says the network will not immediately return to the platform.

"At this point I have lost my faith in the decision-making at Twitter," he says. "I would need some time to understand whether Twitter can be trusted again."

NPR is instituting a "two-week grace period" so the staff who run the Twitter accounts can revise their social-media strategies. Lansing says individual NPR journalists and staffers can decide for themselves whether to continue using Twitter.

In an email to staff explaining the decision, Lansing wrote, "It would be a disservice to the serious work you all do here to continue to share it on a platform that is associating the federal charter for public media with an abandoning of editorial independence or standards."

For years, many journalists considered Twitter critical to monitoring news developments, to connect with people at major events and with authoritative sources, and to share their coverage. Musk's often hastily announced policy changes have undermined that. Lansing says that degradation in the culture of Twitter — already often awash in abusive content — contributed to NPR's decision to pull back.

Musk proves conciliatory and erratic in BBC interview​

PBS, which also receives money from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, and the BBC, which is funded by a uniform license fee charged to British television viewers, are among those whose Twitter accounts were given the same designation.

In the new interview with the BBC's James Clayton, Musk almost appeared to be seeking a compromise with the journalist. He said Twitter would adjust its labels for the British public broadcaster to "publicly funded."

"We're trying to be accurate," Musk said. "I actually do have a lot of respect for the BBC." He said the interview offered him a chance to "get some feedback on what we should be doing different."

When questioned by Clayton, Musk replied that the "publicly funded" label would apply to NPR as well. The change was not made before NPR's decision on Wednesday morning, however.

The BBC exchange showed Musk as alternately conciliatory and erratic. He also said that he's sleeping on a couch at work, that he followed through on his promise to purchase Twitter only because a judge forced him to, and that he should stop tweeting after 3 a.m.

"The point is the independence," NPR leader says​

Lansing says Musk is focusing attention on the wrong element of the equation.

"The whole point isn't whether or not we're government funded," Lansing says. "Even if we were government funded, which we're not, the point is the independence, because all journalism has revenue of some sort."

NPR's board is appointed without any government influence. And the network has at times tangled with both Democratic and Republican administrations. For example, NPR joined with other media organizations to press the Obama administration for access to closed hearings involving detainees held by U.S. authorities at Guantanamo Bay. And "All Things Considered" host Mary Louise Kelly stood her ground in questioning then-Secretary of State Mike Pompeo over then-President Donald Trump's actions in Ukraine despite being berated by Pompeo.

Most of NPR's funding comes from corporate and individual supporters and grants. It also receives significant programming fees from member stations. Those stations, in turn, receive about 13 percent of their funds from the CPB and other state and federal government sources.

It isn't clear that a withdrawal from Twitter will materially affect NPR's ability to reach an online audience. NPR's primary Twitter account has 8.8 million followers — more than a million more than follow the network on Facebook. Yet Facebook is a much bigger platform, and NPR's Facebook posts often are far more likely to spur engagement or click-throughs to NPR's own website. NPR Music has almost 10 times more followers on YouTube than it does on Twitter, and the video platform serves as one of the primary conduits for its popular Tiny Desk Series.

Musk uses Twitter to question the legitimacy of media outlets​

NPR's decision follows a week of public acrimony, as Musk has used his platform to cast doubt on the legitimacy of major news organizations.

The billionaire, who bought Twitter in October, previously announced he would remove check marks from the accounts of legacy news organizations unless the outlets paid for them. The coveted marks once meant Twitter had verified the authenticity of an account belonging to a news organization, government or public figure. Now, they can be bought through a monthly subscription.

Musk also singled out The New York Times earlier this month, removing its check mark and calling its reporting "propaganda." Twitter's communications shop now simply responds to reporters' emails with poop emojis.

At least three public radio stations preceded NPR to the exits at Twitter: Member stations KCRW in Santa Monica, Calif., WESA in Pittsburgh and WEKU, which serves central and eastern Kentucky.

Fears that Twitter label could endanger journalists​

Journalism and freedom-of-speech groups have condemned Twitter's labels, including PEN, the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press and the Committee to Protect Journalists.

"NPR receives public funding, but is not state-controlled, meaning Twitter's listing could pose risks for journalists reporting from areas where suggestions of government affiliation have negative connotations," CPJ's Carlos Martínez de la Serna said in a statement urging Twitter to revisit its decision.

Twitter's own guidelines previously said, "State-financed media organizations with editorial independence, like the BBC in the UK or NPR in the US for example, are not defined as state-affiliated media for the purposes of this policy."

That language has now been removed. In addition to NPR and the BBC, Twitter recently labeled the U.S. broadcaster Voice of America as government-funded media. Voice of America is part of the federal U.S. Agency for Global Media. But its editorial independence from government officials — at times hard won — is enshrined by law. "The label 'government funded' is potentially misleading and could be construed as also 'government-controlled' – which VOA is most certainly not," VOA spokesperson Bridget Serchak said in a statement to NPR.

Serchak says VOA will continue to raise the distinction in talks with Twitter as the label "causes unwarranted and unjustified concern about the accuracy and objectivity of [its] news coverage."

At Elon Musk's Twitter, unpredictability is the norm​

Like so many policy decisions at the social network of late, Musk applied the label to NPR's Twitter account abruptly. It's still not clear why he became so animated about the issue.

In his exchanges with NPR reporter Allyn, Musk said he was relying on a Wikipedia page dedicated to "publicly funded broadcasters" to determine which accounts should receive the label.

When pressed for how he justifies the disclaimer considering NPR receives meager funding from the government and has complete editorial independence, Musk veered into conspiratorial territory.

"If you really think that the government has no influence on the entity they're funding then you've been marinating in the Kool-Aid for too long," Musk wrote to Allyn.

Musk's push to label the network even ran afoul of the site's own rules. A former Twitter executive who was involved in crafting the guidelines told NPR that the deciding factor in whether to issue the designation was whether an outlet had editorial freedom. The labels, the former executive said, were intended to give users context that a tweet they are seeing may be propaganda.

The messy deliberations on display in Musk's email exchanges over labeling NPR's account are in line with his impulsive leadership style. His changes to the platform often are announced by tweet, with sudden reversals not uncommon, or promised changes never coming to fruition. Because Musk relishes troll-like behavior, there is always a possibility that his pronouncements turn out to be jokes. He has announced that the effective date for the change in the check mark verification system is April 20. The date is an inside joke among people who smoke or consume marijuana.

Disclosure: This story was reported and written by NPR Media Correspondent David Folkenflik and edited by Acting Chief Business Editor Emily Kopp and Managing Editor Vickie Walton-James. NPR's Bobby Allyn and Mary Yang contributed to this story. Under NPR's protocol for reporting on itself, no corporate official or news executive reviewed this story before it was posted publicly.

https://www.npr.org/2023/04/12/1169269161/npr-leaves-twitter-government-funded-media-label (Archive)

Edit: A couple minutes of the BBC interview that was mentioned in the article

 
Last edited:
Used to enjoy listening to NPR as it was attached to the college radio station around here, and often times the stories they were covering were interesting things I wouldn't look into myself. Granted, this was 10 years ago now.

Oh how fast things change in a mere decade.
 
Used to work for a former boss who was a mid-50s carpenter whom was in a DINK marriage with a wife almost exactly as described, but in this case it was he who was the religious acolyte who listened to NPR on the daily. Unsurprisingly, he too was a Trump Derangement Syndrome sufferer with a holier-than-thou attitude towards me for ever daring to defend El Naranja. Needless to say I no longer work for his sorry ass.

And to this I say fucking good. NPR is an odious propaganda mill and it deserves to go extinct as fast as possible if it means their hypnotized listeners will ever regain a shred of sanity.

Back in the day, NPR used to be good for inoffensive background noise. EMR Vallium.
Then during the Obongo years they shifted to anything current-events was soon 100% deepthroating Obama (a sharp change from their generally respectful questioning of Dubya; all that "speaking truth to power" evaporated when it was a nigger in charge). It was unlistenable after 2015 - just constant TDS. The shows were all "One person pissed off about Trump and One person who just slightly dislikes him". My friend I would carpool with used to listen to it and it got to the point I'd told him he'd have to change the station the first time they mention Trump. I think we managed nearly 10 minutes once.

But its no loss. I just remember someone described NPR's entertainment shows as "comedy for people without a sense of humor" and that pretty much nails NPR.

You are a glorified tugboat for the nouveau rich nepo babies that couldn't cut it out in the real world much less the hidden one.

You are state-funded. If you weren't you might be actual journalists.

Naw, too late for that. 10 years ago, maybe. Its now just wall-to-wall prog shitlib agiprop. Even when they do get a story, its always in support of their narrative.
 
Back in the day, NPR used to be good for inoffensive background noise. EMR Vallium.
Then during the Obongo years they shifted to anything current-events was soon 100% deepthroating Obama (a sharp change from their generally respectful questioning of Dubya; all that "speaking truth to power" evaporated when it was a nigger in charge). It was unlistenable after 2015 - just constant TDS. The shows were all "One person pissed off about Trump and One person who just slightly dislikes him". My friend I would carpool with used to listen to it and it got to the point I'd told him he'd have to change the station the first time they mention Trump. I think we managed nearly 10 minutes once.

But its no loss. I just remember someone described NPR's entertainment shows as "comedy for people without a sense of humor" and that pretty much nails NPR.



Naw, too late for that. 10 years ago, maybe. Its now just wall-to-wall prog shitlib agiprop. Even when they do get a story, its always in support of their narrative.
Would the change have happened around 2012, where Obama signed a law that repealed restrictions on domestic propaganda? https://www.congress.gov/bill/112th-congress/house-bill/5736
 
This just shows how little faith/goodwill the govt has in America.
Even in Canada, everyone knows the CBC is funded by the govt but normies don't care, and if CBC was in this situation it wouldn't be disgraceful for them to be called state funded. They'd probably be proud of it.
Everyone in America fucking hates the govt and even goons like NPR know it.
No idea what's with BBC though lol. Maybe their PR person is literally retarded.
 
Car Talk was good, though it's been years since I've listened.
It's been in reruns since 2012 when they officially retired.

Followed shortly thereafter, sadly, with Tom Magliozzi's death in 2014.

F


"Well, it's happened again, you've wasted another perfectly good life hosting NPR's Car Talk, this is Click and Clack the Tappet Brothers, reminding you, don't die like my Brudder!"

"Yeah, and don't die like my brudder!"
 
If they're that upset, maybe they should hand back my tax dollars they're stealing and never again try and get funding from the government. Deal, journos?
Honestly, I think the only reasonable thing to do in response to such slander is to all kill themselves (in real life, not Minecraft).
 
I hate NPR so much. It's non-stop leftist propaganda that literally can't stop sucking nigger/asian/trans/women dick. Anything except white males, god forbid. About a decade ago the talk radio station in my area stopped carrying Alex Jones which is what I primarily listened to. Since I don't listen to podcasts or satellite radiot I'm stuck listening to NPR or whatever dumb "right-wing" old boomer is on that evening when I go to and fro from work. NPR can suck a whole bag of dicks (that's 37 dicks) but they'd probably like that right?
 
This is great. It's a game of chicken. Propagandists like NPR, NYT, Washington Post etc are going to "leave Twitter" with the hopes there is an exodus which would then hurt mean Mr musk. But, I would bet dollars to donuts that Twitter brings in a ton of engagement to these sites and without it they will have reduced traffic. Can reddit make up the difference? How else will the masses gobble up all the shit these "people" "write"?
Maybe, maybe not

One of the complaints the journos have is that Twitter's curation team isn't around to artificially boost them now. The number of impressions they get has likely cratered due this which would make it look feasible to jump ship.

The mistake they make though is in thinking regular twitter users would follow them to another site.

2023-04-12 (1).png
2023-04-12 (2).png
 
Journalists are slimier than ever. They're like cartoon lawyers from Family Guy or The Simpsons. They talk fast, interrupt, every other question is some inane 'gotcha' that they came up with during the week and when the time calls for it they pull out the most irrelevant comments and questions. It's Chewbacca defence stuff.

I'm not a Musk fan - I can't get behind anyone who wants to merge man and machine - but I don't know how anyone could watch that exchange with the BBC interviewer and not think Elon was the good guy for 5 minutes.
 
Kierkegaard has the right take on 99 percent of journos:

I prefer:

"If I could take every single journalist and crucify them along every main highway in the United States, I would. From sea to fucking shining sea, I would let these pieces of human shit rot under a hot Texas sun and be slowly picked apart by carrion birds for their molestation of the truth they were to uphold. I can't believe people haven't strung up these grand betrayers for taking such a hot piss on everything decent in life. They aren't even human. They are so evil and so deceptive, they are a mockery of nature's beauty and an affront to God's presence."
 
Journalism needs to become a more disciplined carreer, like making it a requirement to become a monk and live at a monastery with simple pleasures and spending every day instilling the virtues of objectivity.
 
This is cool and all but if Twitter is going to slap on a government warning label for media accounts they should do it for all of the relevant media outlets and not just some, and also consider adding multiple labels which more specifically describe the relationship a particular outlet has with a government. The U.S. Agency for Global Media oversees Voice of America and Radio Free Europe's operations but VoA is labelled 'Government-funded Media' while RLE doesn't have any label at all. I think 'Government-operated Media' would be a better label for the both of them.
 
NPR had recently tweeted a story about trannies in sports and got fact checked by community notes.

They deleted the tweet and tried to reword it, but got fact checked again by community notes.

I can't help but wonder if that was part of the decision to leave. They don't want to lose their "credibility" but can't risk actually being fact checked.
 
Back