It appears there are still subjects working at X who are shadow banning individuals expressing Conservative viewpoints and posting replies that paint Biden in a negative light by posting his own past public comments. Please contact me if you’re willing to investigate.
Great reporting on Twitter files. I saw your speech at the Buckley Insittute. You stated that what is occurring is about "Insiders vs Outsiders", not Democrats and Republicans. If this is true how do you reconcile that all the insiders are elected Democrats, appointed Democrats or Democrat supporters inside and outside of government within their respective institutions? It is been reported that the mainstream media, federal employees/union and academics collectively support Democrats by a wide margin like 90%. Isn't this a triumph of brainwashing, corrupt hiring practices by hiring only liked minded people in these institutions and a lack of critical thinking engendered by substandard education?
Not sure if Matt sees this, but thought it was worth sharing.
First, I am a big fan of your reporting. I spent eleven years in finance, so knew about your classic “Vampire Squid” article in Rolling Stone when it was first published.
I served for three years as a portfolio manager and we were constantly trying to boil down complex, nuanced analysis to help investors get to the rationale behind our recommendations.
What evolved was a reporting format that all the sell-side firms adopted - roughly three sections for each report that I’ve heard referenced as the “unfolding rose” or the “elevator pitch.”
The article is like a rose that starts out in compact form and then unfolds as it develops.
Section one is a very concise summary of the goals and objectives of the report - “above the fold.”
Section two was an outline expansion of the bullet points highlighted in section one.
Section three was for the people who need all the details of how the analysis was conducted.
I think it might that style might help the average reader of Twitter files unpack all this incredible insight.
Excellent reporting!
Hey Matt, 60 Minutes and Leslie Stahl just misinforming Americans with major gaslighting. Disgusting!
It appears there are still subjects working at X who are shadow banning individuals expressing Conservative viewpoints and posting replies that paint Biden in a negative light by posting his own past public comments. Please contact me if you’re willing to investigate.
Great, Tabbi ! Smoking.
WaPo (Democracy Dies In Darkness) is demanding the return of social media censorship:
"Following Elon Musk’s lead, Big Tech is surrendering to disinformation"
https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/08/25/political-conspiracies-facebook-youtube-elon-musk/
OT Not a paid subscriber, so I can't comment over at the Bartleby, the Scrivener post, which mentioned Melville's The Confidence Man.
But not Benito Cereno.
(Silence, long silence.)
I'd say why not, but that's a cheap shot. Rather I assume you weren't aware of it.
Of course next up on the Really Incorrect Reviews/Discussions of AmLit would be Twain's Puddinhead Wilson.
'I know you down for it'.
Or up as the case may be.
cheers
Great reporting on Twitter files. I saw your speech at the Buckley Insittute. You stated that what is occurring is about "Insiders vs Outsiders", not Democrats and Republicans. If this is true how do you reconcile that all the insiders are elected Democrats, appointed Democrats or Democrat supporters inside and outside of government within their respective institutions? It is been reported that the mainstream media, federal employees/union and academics collectively support Democrats by a wide margin like 90%. Isn't this a triumph of brainwashing, corrupt hiring practices by hiring only liked minded people in these institutions and a lack of critical thinking engendered by substandard education?
Not sure if Matt sees this, but thought it was worth sharing.
First, I am a big fan of your reporting. I spent eleven years in finance, so knew about your classic “Vampire Squid” article in Rolling Stone when it was first published.
I served for three years as a portfolio manager and we were constantly trying to boil down complex, nuanced analysis to help investors get to the rationale behind our recommendations.
What evolved was a reporting format that all the sell-side firms adopted - roughly three sections for each report that I’ve heard referenced as the “unfolding rose” or the “elevator pitch.”
The article is like a rose that starts out in compact form and then unfolds as it develops.
Section one is a very concise summary of the goals and objectives of the report - “above the fold.”
Section two was an outline expansion of the bullet points highlighted in section one.
Section three was for the people who need all the details of how the analysis was conducted.
I think it might that style might help the average reader of Twitter files unpack all this incredible insight.