CBC mainly remains off X, citing low traffic six months after scaling back presenc

Comments

• Grant_M@lemmy.ca ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  CBC and any mainstream media outlet would benefit by creating a Fediverse presence. It would be cheap for them to run a Mastodon instance, (for instance) 🇨🇦

  source

  • cyborganism@lemmy.ca ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    I’ve already told my MPs both federal and provincial to create accounts on mstdn.ca instead of the now alt-right hatred fueled X.

    source

    • Grant_M@lemmy.ca ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Awesome! That would be a really good step as well. So far I haven’t seen any at all. But we do have a Senator among us! @Paulatics@mstdn.ca

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • cheese_greater@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Excellent idea, will replicate when I have the energy

      source
  • art@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    There’s also a really nice activity pub plugin for WordPress, a platform that is already in use by a lot of media outlets.

    source
• Pons_Aelius@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  NPR found the same thing in the states. Engaging on that site does not increase traffic or readership for the news outlet.

  So, don't and let the bots have it.

  source
• AccidentalLemming@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  [deleted]

  source

  • Nighed@sffa.community ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    I don’t get Masterson/Twitter - all I see in that link are the list of their posts, nothinf about people interacting with them?

    source

    • AccidentalLemming@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      People are definitely interacting with them. Example: social.bbc/@BBCRadio4/111283440897928435

      source
• pewgar_seemsimandroid@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  im not a bot tho

  source

  • PrincessLeiasCat@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Exactly what a bot would say!

    source

    • pewgar_seemsimandroid@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      check my profile you will see that im an human

      source
  • Pons_Aelius@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    When you program a bot, the first thing you do is make sure it does not know its a bot.

    source

    • pewgar_seemsimandroid@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      it just feels like every post that just goes to an article is made my a bot

      source
    • cheese_greater@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      I feel like their should be a HappyFeet-esque treatment of Bots and their “upbringing”

      source
• fosstulate@iusearchlinux.fyi ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  In a letter written to X’s head of global government affairs Nick Pickles on April 17, the CBC said their label was “factually incorrect” because the government doesn’t have involvement in CBC’s editorial decisions.

  Many public broadcasters are set up so that their governance is done at ‘arms-length’ from the sitting government. The problem is that the mechanisms used to achieve this (usually a government-appointed board of directors, a parliamentary committee, etc.) often intervene in coverage on behalf of an annoyed government, including as threats to litigate against the entity, termination threats against the director or other personnel, tabling of targeted legislation designed to make the entity’s life worse, etc. These governance bodies are kind of like car brakes made of balsa wood: rock solid when not needed, then a pile of sawdust during the organization’s time of need.

  And it’s for that reason I’m happy with X’s label, even though I value public broadcasting, because history has shown executive government really does march in and insist on particular publishing decisions. The motive for the label may be ideological given Musk’s record, but it has some utility to the reader in that it reminds them of a broader, awkward truth about government funding.

  source

  • barsoap@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    The main issue with X’s labelling wasn’t that they did it, or some grand semantic difference between state vs. public broadcasters, but that they didn’t apply it evenly.

    NPR was labelled a “state broadcaster” even though it’s at best public, while DW wasn’t labelled at all, and btw youtube labels it as public broadcaster, which is factually incorrect, it is a state broadcaster, not allowed to broadcast within Germany itself both because it’s not public and also because it’s run by the federal level. Its editorial policy is literally identical to German foreign policy doctrine (though it has to be said that that doesn’t mean that it’s a bad source of news, it’s in fact a very good one, same as say the Guardian having a policy doesn’t mean they’re a bad source).

    If you label one, you have to label them all. If you make a difference between public vs. state, bloody get it right.

    source
• cheese_greater@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  X needs an involuntary “government-funded anti-government twat” checkmark

  source
• pewgar_seemsimandroid@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  milestone

  source