[mwsfc]

Not at all ragequitting and not degrading to NPR. Staying on the platform tacitly implies NPR accepts the label ...which would be degrading, from their perspective.

[kylecordes]

I think people should be slower to act.

Around the time they left, the label had already been improved to mention funding instead of affiliation.

If they could just be a bit chill about it, is quite possible within a month it might have been replaced with a approximate-percentage-funding label, which should not be particularly offensive.

Would be really slick to see all media accounts have company ownership / funding listed.

[ImPostingOnHN]

"people" here refers to elmu,

and the acting refers to his label changes,

right?

[kylecordes]

Both. Elon's approach to all this is pointlessly erratic, alienating himself from numerous people and orgs he could really use as allies. He might be right that moving entirely to paid verification is needed... but even if that is needed, it could be rolled out over a long time, with much less alienation of the user base.

NPR could benefit from a bit of patience also: realize how erratic the counterparty is, and wait a bit to see what shakes out.

[ImPostingOnHN]

asking NPR to be patient while elmu abuses and insults them is like asking an abused spouse to just stick around in case their abuser with a history of abuse & gaslighting suddenly and inexplicably cleans up their act

at the very least, twitter & elmu have to understand their actions were wrong and show conciliation for wronging them – if they're incapable of that bare minimum, there's obviously no hope of them cleaning up their act

[bigtex88]

Or maybe they realize there's no benefit of being on Twitter anymore and they're not willing to take disrespect from a trollish man-child?

It's a pit of right-wing extremism and some of the most fawning sycophancy I've ever seen.

[kylecordes]

Experiences seem to vary a lot. Some people report the Twitter feed changed radically for the worse. Others (including me) have found it's about the same. I think it must depend greatly on what accounts you follow.

[nailer]

If NPR doesn’t wish to accept the label it should refuse government funding.

[rondini]

If Twitter wants to survive it should stop antagonizing large users to make political statements

[nailer]

The policy isn’t political, it applies to all government funded media accounts.

[minsc_and_boo]

BBC just had their state-affiliated label removed.

https://twitter.com/BBC

[nailer]

It’s been replaced with “publicly funded” which I think will also apply to NPR.

[minsc_and_boo]

Which makes you wonder why it was never applied.

[orwin]

So any company accepting grants is a state-affiliated company?

Honestly I kinda like it. I would extend it to any company accepting tax breaks.

Imagine the headline 'The church of the Last days, a state-affiliated non-profit, is warning that the end is near'.

[dylan604]

McDonalds, a state funded eatery,... (because they accept tax breaks)

Amazon, a state funded company,... (because they shopped around for the best tax breaks)

Or any single other company that does what a company does by making any deal they can to better their bottom lines by taking tax breaks or gov't funding in any form would need to be called state funded.

It sort of loses its stigma from that view point.

[yamtaddle]

The "known to the state of California to cause cancer" of funding-labeling.

[dylan604]

i was thinking the cookie consent banner numbing, but yeah, i've always joked that i'm glad to live in a much less carcinogenic state than california.

[nailer]

Any media company accepting grants from the state is indeed state affiliated, yes.