←back to thread

Why the Guardian is no longer posting on X

(www.theguardian.com)
243 points Jimmc414 | 1 comments | 13 Nov 24 20:58 UTC | HN request time: 0.21s | source
Show context
seydor ◴[13 Nov 24 21:53 UTC] No.42130473[source]▶
Yann Lecun is also telling everyone on Twitter very loudly that he won't be posting on Twitter.

The Guardian in another article explains that they are annoyed because Musk used twitter to promote his preferred candidate.

The Guardian itself used their own platform to publicly endorse Harris.

This deja-vu of childish antics is just comical in 2024

replies(18): >>42130525 #>>42130571 #>>42130597 #>>42130616 #>>42130620 #>>42130694 #>>42130705 #>>42130752 #>>42130802 #>>42130828 #>>42130857 #>>42130892 #>>42130907 #>>42131498 #>>42131663 #>>42131841 #>>42132444 #>>42134987 #
montagg ◴[13 Nov 24 22:13 UTC] No.42130705[source]▶
Maybe this isn't something you believe, but actual adults can have different opinions and then choose not to associate with one another. There's nothing childish about that.

Help me understand, though: what are you actually proposing? That The Guardian, while feeling they can't get their own message out given how Musk runs Twitter, should stay on Twitter? Should anyone disadvantaged by how Twitter is run stay there?

replies(4): >>42130766 #>>42131429 #>>42132525 #>>42132805 #
1. valval ◴[13 Nov 24 23:35 UTC] No.42131429[source]▶
I’m more interested in what it is you’re proposing with your questions. It seems like you’re implying that the way “Musk runs” X would disadvantage media sites like The Guardian operating on their platform.