Is there evidence of this besides some guys claims? Did it affect all tech reporters or did a strange manager lie and affect just a couple?
> Social media companies have been steadily usurping the power that traditional media once had. It's also a fight among the professional-managerial class over who gets to have power and define what 'truth' is
This seems really...ironic. The benefit of the news over social media is that the former has a reputation for being reliable, explicitly saying "you can only cover X positively" or "you can only cover X negatively" is a really good way to destroy both. If true, this actually makes social media more reliable than the news, because news reporters can be fired and their articles not published, but it is actually very hard to censor millions of people and 100% control the dialogue or punish anonymous users beyond banning them.
By hiring only the like-minded, top-down decisions can appear organic. In the words of Chomsky:
I don't say you're self-censoring. I'm sure you believe everything you're saying. But what I'm saying is if you believed something different, you wouldn't be sitting where you're sitting. - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1nBx-37c3c8
Is there evidence of this besides some guys claims? Did it affect all tech reporters or did a strange manager lie and affect just a couple?
> Social media companies have been steadily usurping the power that traditional media once had. It's also a fight among the professional-managerial class over who gets to have power and define what 'truth' is
This seems really...ironic. The benefit of the news over social media is that the former has a reputation for being reliable, explicitly saying "you can only cover X positively" or "you can only cover X negatively" is a really good way to destroy both. If true, this actually makes social media more reliable than the news, because news reporters can be fired and their articles not published, but it is actually very hard to censor millions of people and 100% control the dialogue or punish anonymous users beyond banning them.
>There was a top-down decision that tech could not be covered positively
I'm sure this is just a one-off and no other topic or industry receives similar top-down directives.
By hiring only the like-minded, top-down decisions can appear organic. In the words of Chomsky:
I don't say you're self-censoring. I'm sure you believe everything you're saying. But what I'm saying is if you believed something different, you wouldn't be sitting where you're sitting. - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1nBx-37c3c8