Gab.com’s Response to Congress

Re:Gab.com’s Response to Congress by josephcsible on Thursday September 02, 2021 @11:12AM (#28393036)

I don't know of a perfect formal definition, but this kind of gives a rule of thumb: is the content considered their own voice? For example, The New York Times is a publisher, because if an article on their website says X, then saying "The New York Times says X" would be reasonable, but Facebook is a platform, because saying "Facebook says X" just because a post on their website says X would not be reasonable.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Gab.com’s Response to Congress by tptacek on Thursday September 02, 2021 @11:58AM (#28393690)

Whether you say "The New York Times says X" or "Astead Herndon said this" is entirely subjective, and has more to do with what culture currents you pay attention to than with anything particular about the NYT. Illuminating counterexample: a pretty good chunk of nerd Twitter routinely refers to "what HN has said".

So no, that won't work. Try again.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Gab.com’s Response to Congress by fragmede on Thursday September 02, 2021 @06:58PM (#28398416)

Abstracting out the subject becomes a problem, and the hated gatekeepers of knowledge become the necessary filter in front of the firehose.

[ Parent | on HN ]