Technology

37739 readers

474 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

alyaza@beehaw.org

TheRtRevKaiser@beehaw.org

gyrfalcon@beehaw.org

rs5th@beehaw.org

coldredlight@beehaw.org

Los@beehaw.org

SemioticStandard@beehaw.org

TheRtRevKaiser@kbin.social

remington@beehaw.org

565

Megathread for Reddit Blackouts and News - Week 1 (beehaw.org)

submitted 1 year ago by Gaywallet@beehaw.org to c/technology@beehaw.org

520 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Hey everyone. If you want to post links or discuss the Reddit blackout, please localize it to this thread in order to keep things tidy!

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] admin@beehaw.org 12 points 1 year ago (9 children)

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/12/business/media/reddit-subreddit-blackout-protest.html

[–] Powderhorn@beehaw.org 34 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (8 children)

Mr. Rathschmidt added that some apps are more efficient and require significantly fewer A.P.I. calls and that “Apollo is notably less efficient than other third-party apps.”

“The vast majority of A.P.I. users will not have to pay for access; not all third-party apps usage requires paid access,” he wrote, adding that access is “is free for moderator tools and bots.”

That is some shoddy reporting there. Selig is cited earlier in the piece, so to let that quote stand unchallenged either means an editor didn't see it or ... well, I'd rather not get more confirmation from the Times on that front.

[–] Thorned_Rose@beehaw.org 17 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I've noticed this a lot about mainstream reporting - seems to give more voice to corporates than anyone else.

I've read a number of articles on the protest over the past few days and not a single of them really explained all the issues well.

[–] Cube6392@beehaw.org 18 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Journalists are often outsiders to these disputes and a full nuanced description of the situation requires more time than it takes to be the first reporter with the scoop in a world where news outlets pay more for news to be newest than news to be most accurate
News outlets are big corporations and will often be favorable to corporations
Corporations usually give very simple canned statements that are very east to parse and publish while dispersed groups such as unions, protestors, and online forum members have much less centralized narrative and can have a litany of different reasons for sharing a similar stance

[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 10 points 1 year ago

I've experienced 1 first-hand. They call you and leave a voicemail. If you don't respond within 24 hours they're going to publish anyway and probably get a lot of things wrong.

I hear PR companies will basically write for the journalists on request, and sometimes journalists will take it just to get ahead.

[–] DarkDarkHouse@lemmy.sdf.org 9 points 1 year ago

It’s more difficult when they can’t just call up John Mastodon from the Fediverse PR department and copy-paste a press release.

[–] Powderhorn@beehaw.org 2 points 1 year ago

Corporate journalism has its own special place in hell for me. After all the creativity was removed from rather central editing functions, I set about automating what was left at a hub and got shown the door when the efficiencies started to threaten justifying salaried positions.

[–] Powderhorn@beehaw.org 1 points 1 year ago

I can chalk a lot of that up to the presumed reader knowledge in the Times style guide simplifying things tremendously. I mean, who knows if anyone uses those anymore ...

It's just really glaring to have a quote with a claim that's not easy to immediately verify as a reporter (1/x^th^ the efficiency, per [source 1] / [source 2]) with the creator of the app quoted earlier but not used here. I would be livid if that made it to the desk.

load more comments (5 replies)