←back to thread

Why the Guardian is no longer posting on X

(www.theguardian.com)
243 points Jimmc414 | 3 comments | 13 Nov 24 20:58 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
dagurp ◴[13 Nov 24 21:48 UTC] No.42130399[source]▶
But why haven't they posted on Mastodon in two years https://mstdn.social/@TheGuardian
replies(2): >>42130502 #>>42130516 #
EarlKing ◴[13 Nov 24 21:56 UTC] No.42130502[source]▶
Because Mastodon and the entire Fediverse is infested with the most rabid sort of users that even Twitter couldn't stomach and has turned a blind eye to this fact? I mean, there's a reason why they keep getting brought up over and over and people continually nope out of signing up over there. They've got a demographic problem, they refuse to acknowledge it, and it's killing growth. Why would any media outlet want to participate knowing that?
replies(3): >>42130581 #>>42130640 #>>42131101 #
talldayo ◴[13 Nov 24 22:08 UTC] No.42130640[source]▶
> Why would any media outlet want to participate knowing that?

Presumably for the same reason they find the optics of X acceptable but what do I know.

replies(1): >>42131614 #
1. EarlKing ◴[13 Nov 24 23:59 UTC] No.42131614[source]▶
Pretty sure there's a massive difference in both the breadth and scope of the demographics of X and Mastodon/the Fediverse.
replies(1): >>42149090 #
2. talldayo ◴[15 Nov 24 17:41 UTC] No.42149090[source]▶
Are the Nazis more or less courteous on X? I'm not sure which distinction you're trying to make here.
replies(1): >>42191515 #
3. EarlKing ◴[20 Nov 24 07:23 UTC] No.42191515[source]▶
If you think everyone on X is a "nazi" then clearly you've got problems. Twitter appeals to a massive audience, whereas alternatives do not. Media outlets will go where the eyeballs are... and that's not to Bluesky, to Mastodon, to the Fediverse... but to Twitter... which is populated by people, not nazis.