SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: i-node who wrote (773223)12/3/2022 8:30:21 PM
From: skinowski5 Recommendations

Recommended By
Hoa Hao
i-node
pak73
pheilman_
Sdgla

  Respond to of 793840
 
Freedom of speech and individual rights are the very foundation of this country. They suffered some erosion over time - but there was no major, direct attack against them - until recently.

Musk taking over TWTR gives those who respect American values a chance to fight back.



To: i-node who wrote (773223)12/4/2022 4:41:02 PM
From: Alan Smithee2 Recommendations

Recommended By
i-node
Tom Clarke

  Respond to of 793840
 
Before this is over Matt Taibbi is going to play a role in sorting this stuff out an augmenting it with facts. He is a first rate writer and I keep getting his emails but never subscribe but I think it is time for me to do that.
Matt Taibbi is a rare thing. A real and honest journalist.

I’m inclined to pony up the $50 to be a supporter on his Substack.

taibbi.substack.com

I suspect you received this in e-mail from him:


The following is a transcript of the Munk Debates in Toronto last Wednesday, November 30th, in which author Douglas Murray and I took on New Yorker contributor Malcolm Gladwell and columnist Michelle Goldberg of the New York Times. As noted, we won with the largest swingin the event’s history, moving from a 48%-52% voter deficit to a 67%-33% win. Because the entire transcript exceeds Google’s email limit, this portion is edited for size, but there’s a video you can access here, and you can also click through to a PDF here.

I know people have other questions for me, which I’ll address soon. One quick note. It’s interesting that the Twitter Files story broke just after this debate about the mainstream press. The fact that that story couldn’t have appeared in a legacy publication, and despite being picked up around the world wasn’t covered at all in papers like the New York Times (which has lavishly covered new Twitter chief Elon Musk’s every other move) is the ultimate demonstration of why there’s a trust problem. The Washington Post waited a day, then pulled a Jason Robards/Ben Bradlee and “stick it inside somewhere” job last night.

I failed to make this point in the debate, but the question people always have when assessing journalists is, “Whose side are they on?” The public rightly expects to be the main client. What we’ve seen in the wake of the Twitter story is fury by legacy reporters (in humorously identical language) at an attempt to address public concerns and curiosity, coupled with a lot of weeping on behalf of people like Twitter’s former chief censor, Yoel Roth, who can be seen here complaining about the “trauma” he and other “content moderators” experienced after events like January 6th. The press, culturally, has been transformed from an institution that reflexively identified with the broad audience, to one whose first instinct is to protect the people they’re meant to cover. That seems an insuperable problem, and a subtext of the discussion below. We removed my opening remarks, already published last week. Anyway:...