UK’s The Guardian stops posting on X due to ‘disturbing content’ on platform

[Claira]

Why the Guardian is no longer posting on X

We wanted to let readers know that we will no longer post on any official Guardian editorial accounts on the social media site X (formerly Twitter). We think that the benefits of being on X are now outweighed by the negatives and that resources could be better used promoting our journalism elsewhere.

This is something we have been considering for a while given the often disturbing content promoted or found on the platform, including far-right conspiracy theories and racism. The US presidential election campaign served only to underline what we have considered for a long time: that X is a toxic media platform and that its owner, Elon Musk, has been able to use its influence to shape political discourse.

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2024/nov/13/why-the-guardian-is-no-longer-posting-on-x

[CrimsonKing]

To be fair to X,I have seen all kinds of crazy posted across the Internet from X accounts from all sides...

That's kind of the point of freedom of speech,no one is going to like everything others say, that's why we have the ability to ignore what we choose to.

[stevewinn]

If Harris would've won the Guardian would still been on X.

 

[itsnotoutthere]

Edited November 14 by itsnotoutthere

[itsnotoutthere]

Funny that the Guardian is the only 'news outlet' I can find that has it's reader comments always turned off. Wonder why?

[Essan]

1 hour ago, itsnotoutthere said:

Funny that the Guardian is the only 'news outlet' I can find that has it's reader comments always turned off. Wonder why?

I'm surprised any serious news outlet allows any reader comments.   In my experience the only people who comment are those who use social media to tell they world how dumb, ignorant or bigotted they are

[itsnotoutthere]

21 minutes ago, Essan said:

I'm surprised any serious news outlet allows any reader comments.   In my experience the only people who comment are those who use social media to tell they world how dumb, ignorant or bigotted they are

Yes, and I'm not surprised you think that way. 

Edited November 14 by itsnotoutthere

[Essan]

15 minutes ago, itsnotoutthere said:

Yes, and I'm not surprised you think that way. 

If you'd seen some of the chemtrail and flat earth nonsense I've had to deal with this week you'd understand even more     

[itsnotoutthere]

10 minutes ago, Essan said:

If you'd seen some of the chemtrail and flat earth nonsense I've had to deal with this week you'd understand even more     

Yes, since they shut down the asylums it's all got a bit crazy out there for sure.

[L.A.T.1961]

I doubt if the G will find a big platform they agree with.

Boxing themselves into a corner is doing most people a favor. 😉

[itsnotoutthere]

 

[itsnotoutthere]

 

[psyche101]

Over the last year or two many news sources have left X over misinformation and toxicity. 

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/tech/which-brands-quit-x-twitter-elon-musk-guardian-npr-balenciaga-b1193886.html

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.abc.net.au/article/102706816

 

It's the responsible thing to do.

[pellinore]

11 hours ago, psyche101 said:

It's the responsible thing to do.

It's not only responsible, it is to do with reputation. It is why many companies refuse to advertise on GBNews (and why their flagship presenter, Andrew Neil, left after just a month). Despite being called "populists" the likes of Andrew Tate, Farage, Trump, Tommy Robinson, etc. aren't actually popular- they represent a dangerous and pernicious minority who want to overturn democracy .

[itsnotoutthere]

On 11/20/2024 at 11:00 PM, pellinore said:

It's not only responsible, it is to do with reputation. It is why many companies refuse to advertise on GBNews (and why their flagship presenter, Andrew Neil, left after just a month). Despite being called "populists" the likes of Andrew Tate, Farage, Trump, Tommy Robinson, etc. aren't actually popular- they represent a dangerous and pernicious minority who want to overturn democracy .

Says the guy that wants to overturn the democratic vote to leave the EU. 

Edited November 22 by itsnotoutthere

[stevewinn]

It's more to do with the shock when you shout in the echo chamber and the echo chamber shouts something different back.

In the guardians case, they shouted Harris victory, but the resonating sound coming back was the American people shouting Trump, Eeeeelon,

Guardian didn't like that, so they've ditch X. and will instead focus on the Echo chambers that "work" for them.

[itsnotoutthere]

Interestingly, I looked up 'uk national newspaper circulation figures' graph The Sun came top with 3.5 million per day, followed by the Mail on 3million per day followed by all the others & at the bottom was the Guardian on 200 thousand per day (suspect most of those were sold to BBC headquarters). So yes, a very small echo chamber.

Edited November 22 by itsnotoutthere

[stevewinn]

33 minutes ago, itsnotoutthere said:

Interestingly, I looked up 'uk national newspaper circulation figures' graph The Sun came top with 3.5 million per day, followed by the Mail on 3million per day followed by all the others & at the bottom was the Guardian on 200 thousand per day (suspect most of those were sold to BBC headquarters). So yes, a very small echo chamber.

the Guardian is propped up by Soros, no shareholder meetings at the guardian.

But something's that are harder to fudge, like daily circulation figures falling like a stone, the Guardian don't even publish daily print figures no more. but i remember seeing the figure at less than 70,000 a day. down from about 210,000 ten years ago.

Edited November 22 by stevewinn

[itsnotoutthere]

That word 'progressive' always makes me laugh.

[stevewinn]

4 minutes ago, itsnotoutthere said:

That word 'progressive' always makes me laugh.

that's the method, the same one they used on the boiling frog. (metaphor)

[itsnotoutthere]

Having said that, with regard to that piece you pasted the word 'liberal' is also rather amusing.

[pellinore]

11 hours ago, itsnotoutthere said:

Says the guy that wants to overturn the democratic vote to leave the EU. 

There was a democratic vote to make Tony Blair PM in 1997. Is it undemocratic that we have moved on, or do you think we should still respect the 'Will of the People' in 1997 and bring him back as PM? The thing about life and politics is that time changes everything- we can't freeze it and make "forever decisions"- if that was the case there would be no progress.

[+Hammerclaw]

On 11/13/2024 at 8:27 AM, Claira said:

Why the Guardian is no longer posting on X

We wanted to let readers know that we will no longer post on any official Guardian editorial accounts on the social media site X (formerly Twitter). We think that the benefits of being on X are now outweighed by the negatives and that resources could be better used promoting our journalism elsewhere.

This is something we have been considering for a while given the often disturbing content promoted or found on the platform, including far-right conspiracy theories and racism. The US presidential election campaign served only to underline what we have considered for a long time: that X is a toxic media platform and that its owner, Elon Musk, has been able to use its influence to shape political discourse.

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2024/nov/13/why-the-guardian-is-no-longer-posting-on-x

What's the Guardian, some sort of yellow journal?

[+Hammerclaw]

On 11/14/2024 at 8:02 AM, itsnotoutthere said:

Funny that the Guardian is the only 'news outlet' I can find that has it's reader comments always turned off. Wonder why?

It's hard to hear their echo when other people are talking?  I remember when MSN did the same thing.

[+Hammerclaw]

On 11/14/2024 at 9:06 AM, Essan said:

I'm surprised any serious news outlet allows any reader comments.   In my experience the only people who comment are those who use social media to tell they world how dumb, ignorant or bigotted they are

We have legacy media dedicated to that mission over here.