[S33V]

Here's Twitter's documentation on how they identify state-affiliated media[1]. This excerpt makes the decision seem outside of the defined process:

  State-affiliated media is defined as outlets where the state exercises control 
  over editorial content through financial resources, direct or indirect 
  political pressures, and/or control over production and distribution. Accounts 
  belonging to state-affiliated media entities, their editors-in-chief, and/or 
  their prominent staff may be labeled.

  State-financed media organizations with editorial independence, like the BBC 
  in the UK for example, are not defined as state-affiliated media for the 
  purposes of this policy.

[1] https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/state-affilia...

[rektide]

Just one example, the NPR article on NPR laying a bunch of people off has this disclosure at the end:

> Disclosure: This story was reported and written by NPR Media Correspondent David Folkenflik and edited by Acting Chief Business Editor Emily Kopp. 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/2023/02/22/1158710498/npr-layoffs-2023

This is a protocol specifically on "reporting on [themselves]" but it's a solid-ish example of the org not being a top-down controlled entity, and indeed, of making sure the org can report transparently on itself. NPR feels extremely not government controlled.

[anigbrowl]

If you look in the article, it links to an archived copy of the same document, which included NPR alongside the BBC.

[brucethemoose2]

Could the British government influence BBC stories if they really went of the rails and attacked the govt?

I am not British and don't have a good feel for the BBC, though I am fairly confident NPR can do government hit stories and such.

[anigbrowl]

Yes, both indirectly and directly. Indirectly, in that BBC editorial policy is a regular political football, especially with conservatives. Directly (and like all other media) though a 'D notice.'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DSMA-Notice

[plandis]

Didn’t the BBC recently take a soccer announcer off the air after he was critical of the conservative government?

[ncr100]

EDIT: Removed fluff.

Q: At what point is Twitter itself a source of misinformation, or disinformation?

Q: At what point Could this labeling trigger reasonable legal action, around Twitter's apparent conscientious selective moderation => making Twitter "responsible" for everyone's tweets, by NPR?