I'm so tired of these journalist hot takes about the Fediverse.

Elon Musk has declared war on journalists, banned them outright—including journalists from the Washington Post.

So what do these bottom feeders do?

Suck on the teat of Twitter all the more while bad-mouthing an actual solution that can save their dying industry.

What gets me is that the Washington Post made big hoopla about starting their own instance.

And a few weeks after the media's narrative changes, they publish a big article about why Mastodon sucks.

As I've already demonstrated today, that narrative isn't even based on facts—it's pure fiction created by the Guardian to justify staying on Big Social.

This is why no one should trust the Press to educate the masses about the Fediverse.

They will not give a fair assessment.

Instead, they will look at it as conflicting with their interests—and will spin up a narrative that coincides with their interests.

They don't want the Fediverse to succeed because it's not run by corporate interests.

And that's the subtext in Megan McArdle's article.

The Press could easily re-claim the social distribution of their content by simply spinning up their own instances.

And if they were just *slightly* more ambitious, they would build their own social media software that integrates ActivityPub—customized for the needs of journalists.

Instead, they piss away their future by doubling down on Big Social.

@atomicpoet eggghhhh. The press fired their researchers and copy-editors a long time ago, so I'm not sure they'd have the ability to hire a programmer. Patreon-WordPress integration is probably as far as they go. And tech journalism oft' focuses on press releases and media events, with focuses on sponsorship to replace dwindling ad revenue...

  It makes me worried for the fifth estate. 😢