Comment by logifail
6 hours ago
> They're places where people buy a voice and the illusion of support by astroturfing the platform and/or manipulating the algorithm (either through paid advertisements or by owning a platform and controlling the algorithm outright)
Anyone willing to take a good-faith stab at why this couldn't equally well be a description of traditional media too - say - the WaPo?
I challenge the notion that they're equal. Social media at least provides vox while traditional media is completely one-way. How much is astroturfing and illusion can be debated forever, but any positive value is greater than zero. Traditional media acts as programming first. Journalistic integrity and trust in institutions has been sold off for shareholder value.
The Washington Post has changed considerably in the last few months, specifically from being fiercely free to being bought.
> couldn't
Hypothetically, almost anything could happen.
> The Washington Post has changed considerably in the last few months, specifically from being fiercely free to being bought.
I read it every day and hadn't noticed. Can you give examples, beyond having heard of the Presidential Endorsement saga?