What about when the error of fact is more complicated than a misspelled word? It is in those more difficult cases, often involving questions of news judgment and fairness, that the Times can be slower to grapple with its errors. Corbett acknowledges that these cases—not calling somebody for a response, for instance, or leaving readers with the wrong impression—are hard to fit into the corrections rubric. “That’s the kind of thing that we might typically handle with an editor’s note,” he says.
But unlike corrections, it can often take days or even months for an editor’s note to appear. It was an editor’s note, for example, that was used to explain why the Times came to believe two days after it printed an op-ed by Sen. Tom Cotton that the piece “fell short of our standards and should not have been published.” (I wrote about that controversy in my previous column.) It was also an editor’s note that New York Times Magazine editor Jake Silverstein used to explain, in March, the publication’s response to historians who objected to elements of Nikole Hannah-Jones’ introductory essay for the 1619 Project, published seven months earlier. An editor’s note also explained why an unfounded rumor of a young doctor dying of COVID-19 was removed from a first-person essay by an ER doctor six weeks after it ran in the magazine in April.
No, accounts don't "cancel out" or "neutralize" each other. But collectively they compromise the Digital Town Square.
Here's another African American X account (image) headed by Kimberle Crenshaw, initiator of Critical Race Theory. Kimberle also has her own personal X page: https://twitter.com/sandylocks
Could you make your argument as to why you believe Musk promoting far right racists and making sure they have more visibility and influence than they otherwise would have is a positive contribution to the Digital Town Square?
In my opinion, not everything Musk posts is a "positive contribution" to the Digital Town Square. That has no relevance to his making the Digital Town Square a platform of free speech.
Great, you've shown that Musk is both a booster of far right racists as well as promoting solar power.
You make things up.
This probably should be the end of it right here -- if you are going to outright deny that Musk puprposely boosts far right racist views, what can we say to each other? It's difficult to talk with someone who insists that things that happened did not.
Since Musk doesn't only make posts promoting solar power, but also makes posts promoting far right racists, I'd like to hear your argument as for how those latter posts are a positive contribution to the digital town square.
A lot of people in the digital town square -- including a high percentage of liberals who "promote" each other -- have racist views, which I guess makes them racists.
There have been a lot of disturbing poll results over the past several years, but none more than this one: According to a 2016 survey conducted by the Public Religion Research Institute, 57 percent of white Americans believe that discrimination against white people is “as big a problem” in America as discrimination against minorities. Several months after the survey was conducted, of course, Donald Trump went on to win the presidency by getting well over half of the white vote. In a new book called White Fragility: Why It’s So Hard for White People to Talk About Racism, Robin DiAngelo examines how a large chunk of white America got to a place where it is constantly feeling besieged and victimized, and why she thinks even white progressives are so unwilling—or unable—to acknowledge their own racism.
Since Musk doesn't only make posts promoting solar power, but also makes posts promoting far right racists, I'd like to hear your argument as for how those latter posts are a positive contribution to the digital town square.
A lot of people in the digital town square -- including a high percentage of liberals who "promote" each other -- have racist views, which I guess makes them racists.
There have been a lot of disturbing poll results over the past several years, but none more than this one: According to a 2016 survey conducted by the Public Religion Research Institute, 57 percent of white Americans believe that discrimination against white people is “as big a problem” in America as discrimination against minorities. Several months after the survey was conducted, of course, Donald Trump went on to win the presidency by getting well over half of the white vote. In a new book called White Fragility: Why It’s So Hard for White People to Talk About Racism, Robin DiAngelo examines how a large chunk of white America got to a place where it is constantly feeling besieged and victimized, and why she thinks even white progressives are so unwilling—or unable—to acknowledge their own racism.
You continue (purposely, I believe) to miss my point.
Look at your own quotes of Musk right here -- notice what you chose -- posts of his boosting solar power, etc. I notice you did not choose to quote his posts boosting antisemitic conspiracies or those alleging that, for instance, people of color are stupider than white people.
Posting those first posts is not boosting and promoting antisemtism and racism. Posting that latter would have been.
Further, Musk is not just any user, nor is he even merely a user with a large following, he is the owner of the platform. Musk repeatedly chooses to boost far right racist views -- to the point that many large corporations have felt uncomfortable enough to stop advertising on Twitter. Corporations, let's remember, are in it for the money -- they're no one's heroes. If the level of racism Musk is choosing to boost is beyond their tolerance, well...
So, once again, please make your argument why this behavior by Musk is a positive contribution to the digital town square.
Apparently you don't know that the ADL absolved Elon of alleged antisemitic comments, when he embraced the bogus claim that some slogans by pro-Palestinian demonstrators call for the genocide of Jews.
Regarding the Tweet that got Elon into the most trouble, I pointed out that it was anti-semitic:
He called out "Jewish communities" which is an open-ended category of Jews which makes it ant-semitic. If he has specific individuals or organizations in mind he needs to apologize, retract and revise.
I agree that when one makes general statements about "Jews" there's a good chance you're stepping into antisemitism. In one of the links I sent you he clarified that he wasn't referencing all Jews, although his lack of specifics still smacked of antisemitism. But antisemitism --… pic.twitter.com/qSwHJq6INY
Since Musk doesn't only make posts promoting solar power, but also makes posts promoting far right racists, I'd like to hear your argument as for how those latter posts are a positive contribution to the digital town square.
A lot of people in the digital town square -- including a high percentage of liberals who "promote" each other -- have racist views, which I guess makes them racists.
There have been a lot of disturbing poll results over the past several years, but none more than this one: According to a 2016 survey conducted by the Public Religion Research Institute, 57 percent of white Americans believe that discrimination against white people is “as big a problem” in America as discrimination against minorities. Several months after the survey was conducted, of course, Donald Trump went on to win the presidency by getting well over half of the white vote. In a new book called White Fragility: Why It’s So Hard for White People to Talk About Racism, Robin DiAngelo examines how a large chunk of white America got to a place where it is constantly feeling besieged and victimized, and why she thinks even white progressives are so unwilling—or unable—to acknowledge their own racism.
This argument ignores the different definitions of what can be meant by "racism". There is the "racism" of deliberate acts of prejudice (including speech in posts on the Twitter). There is also the "racism" that is structural to our society. Robin D'Angelo's book is about recognizing that "racism" is not only the type in the first definition, but is also something that has to be recognized in society at large.
Paul is using an argument, developed by racists of the "deliberate acts of prejudice" variety, to deliberately distort the point of the book White Fragility.
In discussing Musk and racism, the "racism" at issue is the "deliberate acts of prejudice" variety. In this thread recently, examples of that have been provided (most recently, saying aircraft flaws were connected to "DEI"). Those examples were ignored by the "Musk cheerleader" on this thread.
Here's what Musk said, that you ignored, in the DEI discussion:
I do think that if merit for a given job is roughly the same, then the tiebreaker should be diversity (of all kinds)
Any discussion about DEI has to consider that the most vocal crusader against DEI is Democrat Bill Ackman, who seems to be winning support from at least one prominent liberal:
Here's what Musk said, that you ignored, in the DEI discussion:
Any discussion about DEI has to consider that the most vocal crusader against DEI is Democrat Bill Ackman, who seems to be winning support from at least one prominent liberal:
Here's what Musk said, that you ignored, in the DEI discussion:
Any discussion about DEI has to consider that the most vocal crusader against DEI is Democrat Bill Ackman, who seems to be winning support from at least one prominent liberal:
Edited to add: It should be pointed out that Joe's enabling and complicity with Genocide in Gaza has very definite racist overtones.
Apologist for Assad and Putin trying to act like one of the "cool kids" by chanting "Genocide Joe" all the way to a new Trump presidency.
Stay classy.
Maybe from the comfort of Maplewood NJ you can call what Biden's funding and protecting in the UN Security Council merely something that "cool kids" say. That's not how it looks and feels among the people in Gaza.
Nor is that how it looks and feels to the South African Government, one of the classiest if not the classiest, in the world:
South African lawyers prepare lawsuit against U.S. and UK for complicity in Israel’s war crimes in Gaza
January 16, 2024
Nearly 50 lawyers will gather to file the case that will also strengthen a suit against the Joe Biden administration.
South African lawyers are preparing a lawsuit against the United States and the United Kingdom, accusing them of complicity in Israel’s war crimes in Gaza.
Prompted by South African lawyer Wikus Van Rensburg, the lawsuit aims to prosecute those complicit in Israeli crimes in civilian courts in cooperation with lawyers from the U.S. and UK.
Speaking to the Turkish news agency Anadolu, Rensburg voiced that the United States needs to be held responsible for endorsing the genocidal war that has lasted more than 100 days and killed more than 24,000 civilians.
“The United States must now be held accountable for the crimes it committed,” Rensburg said.
“Many lawyers decided to join us in the lawsuit. Many of those who have joined are Muslims, but I am not. They feel obligated to assist this cause, but I believe that what is happening is incorrect,” Rensburg added.
Paul, you seem to place a lot of store by association -- tying people to one group or another, and seeing that as reason to oppose or support someone. See for instance your response to criticism of Bill Ackman by associating him with Democrats -- the argument, I presume, is meant to be that since most people on this board vote for Democrats then they ought to refrain from criticizing Ackman, or perhaps that since they criticize Ackman they should stop voting for Democrats.
That's one way of approaching things, but not one I subscribe to. I think actions should be judged on their own merits, not as part of some guilt/virtue by association strategy. And that means that often people or institutions one supports in one case one opposes in another.
The context for looking at Musk's actions, here on this thread, is as the owner of Twitter. It's largely irrelevant what he does at Tesla or Solar City or Space X, whether one approves or opposes his actions there, how one feels about climate change, etc.
And at Twitter, as the owner of the platform, he's acted in ways that I believe are overall harmful, in a few fronts:
First and most importantly, he drastically decreased the power of workers at Twitter and attempted to set that up as a model for other business leaders, especially those in tech, to follow. Thankfully, the business outcome of this model has been poor, but very definitely anti-worker.
Second, and what tends to get more attention, is the way Musk has been transforming Twitter the product. Let me try an analogy -- if, at Tesla, Musk not only built electric cars, but also built a line of carbon-intensive vehicles that belched flames and just generally went out of their way to be as polluting and greenhouse-gas emitting as they could legally get away with, I think we could agree this would be a problem? It wouldn't, for instance, be a great defense to change the subject away from these purposely trollish cars by noting that most Tesla vehicles are EVs -- the troll cars would still clearly be an issue. And people would have well founded concerns as to why Musk was going out of his way to build and sell cars whose only purpose was apparently to increase pollution and spew carbon. However fantastic the EV cars Tesla made, it'd be hard to say that Tesla was making a positive contribution to de-carbonizing so long as the CEO was also heavily invested in promoting the troll cars.
At Twitter, Musk has invited far right racists who previously were banned from the platform back on. He posts racist, sexist, anti-semitic, and homophobic tweets. He retweets, with supportive comments, racist, sexist, anti-semitic, and homophobic tweets by others.
Now, maybe you feel that online internet culture was unbalanced, that there was a dearth of highly visible racism and homophobia, and that Musk actively working to inject more of it is somehow supporting free-er speech. I disagree.
I think it started with one or more human beings "flagging" the tweet, filling out a form (see below) and then the machines took it from there.
Drummerboy’s replies on X typically get <10 views. It’s possible that one or more of those viewers leapt within a minute to report it, but I’m still thinking it was programming, which I still can’t imagine catching a misattributed recent quote.
I think it started with one or more human beings "flagging" the tweet, filling out a form (see below) and then the machines took it from there.
Drummerboy’s replies on X typically get <10 views. It’s possible that one or more of those viewers leapt within a minute to report it, but I’m still thinking it was programming, which I still can’t imagine catching a misattributed recent quote.
The audience for the tweet that Mr. Drummerboy responded to, is probably more relevant for how many people may have seen it when it was posted.
In any event, I think the steps involved in determining a quote wasn't matched to the proper person would be fewer, than those involved in linking "Trump", "bleach" and a (false) claim that it was an incitement to violence.
The Ackman/Phillips "point" isn't worth discussing.
Do you expect the Democratic Party to refuse further donations by Bill Ackman and to return the ones he's already made?
I think the last thing they'd want is to stop the f*cking up that Ackman is helping to add to the Phillips campaign.
"The artificial intelligence company OpenAI banned the developer of a bot mimicking long shot Democratic presidential hopeful Rep. Dean Phillips — the first action that the maker of ChatGPT has taken in response to what it sees as a misuse of its AI tools in a political campaign.
"Dean.Bot was the brainchild of Silicon Valley entrepreneurs Matt Krisiloff and Jed Somers, who had started a super PAC supporting Phillips (Minn.) ahead of the New Hampshire primary on Tuesday. The PAC had received $1 million from hedge fund manager Bill Ackman, the billionaire activist who led the charge to oust Harvard University president Claudine Gay."
The audience for the tweet that Mr. Drummerboy responded to, is probably more relevant for how many people may have seen it when it was posted.
Again my hopes for agreement are dashed. Even when DB replies to posts on X with audiences in the hundreds of thousands or millions, he gets single-digit views. Happens to me, too.
In any event, I think the steps involved in determining a quote wasn't matched to the proper person would be fewer, than those involved in linking "Trump", "bleach" and a (false) claim that it was an incitement to violence.
Algorithmic moderation shortcuts may surprise you.
(One way that news-related misinformation can slip through automated moderation: The material that the latest algorithms and A.I. models are trained on is likely to be older than the accurate sources.)
Again my hopes for agreement are dashed. Even when DB replies to posts on X with audiences in the hundreds of thousands or millions, he gets single-digit views. Happens to me, too.
I'm curious how you learned my identity.
And for the record, I never check my engagement numbers. Don't even know how many followers I have.
Likewise, I was curious when a name and face that rang a bell from an old comment on a Village Green article (back when readers could leave comments) chose to start following me. It wasn’t hard then to piece together your timing, profile and posts. Even I could do it.
Likewise, I was curious when a name and face that rang a bell from an old comment on a Village Green article (back when readers could leave comments) chose to start following me. It wasn’t hard then to piece together your timing, profile and posts. Even I could do it.
Likewise, I was curious when a name and face that rang a bell from an old comment on a Village Green article (back when readers could leave comments) chose to start following me. It wasn’t hard then to piece together your timing, profile and posts. Even I could do it.
I would subscribe to and follow a webcomic where Drummerboy and DaveSchmidt travel around the country solving mysteries.
Here's another observation that stands:
https://www.cjr.org/public_editor/nyt-correction-factual-errors-editors-note.php