So State labelled media was basically just keep wrong narratives under wraps, keep people away from them and shaft them down the algorithm where nobody would see it unless they went especially looking for it. It never had anything to do with “state media” since no western state media got the label, never had anything to do with lies, disinformation or propaganda either, since what is wider media these days anyway. It had everything to do with not following the Euro-Atlantic narrative and god forbid letting the designated “enemy countries” voice their side of the story. Why there is so much Twitter/X hate rn. in the media is because the western global ministry of truth fears losing grasp of the narrative if too much freedom is introduced.

I want to hear no bullshit here about how this was actually ever good and necessary and why we need narrative control for “democracy” and for protection of the fragile minds of the plebs who don’t know any better than to believe Russian and Chinese lies.

Which western state media met xitter’s definition of state-affiliated?

NPR. I shit you not.

You know NPR was literally included in xitter’s definition of “state-funded with editorial independence” until Musk shat himself right ?

NPR does receive U.S. government funding through grants from federal agencies and departments, along with the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. The company said it accounts for less than 1% of NPR’s annual operating budget. But until Wednesday, the same Twitter guidelines said that “state-financed media organizations with editorial independence, like the BBC in the UK or NPR in the United States, are not defined as state-affiliated media for the purposes of this policy.”

apnews.com/…/twitter-npr-state-affiliated-media-l…

I think most people who live in the UK can tell you the BBC is extremely bias - they might not be controlled by the gov directly, but the people in charge are very pro right wing

A quick search says that BBC is regularly accused of bias in both directions. Australia’s ABC is definitely accused of both.

Regardless. The policy doesn’t say anything about bias. It’s simply “editorial independence”.