Yeah, I did read the article, and it is exactly why I think it's not organic: are there really that many people interested in Tucker "not 'stating actual facts' about the topics he discusses and is instead engaging in 'exaggeration' and 'non-literal commentary'" Carlson and what would Putin - the dictator of a geopolitically major country, with state media, official and unofficial channels doing go his every bidding for twenty years now - have to say?
Or is that geopolitically major dictatorship preparing to game twitter ahead of a major propaganda push?
I usually don't give a shit about news and don't watch tucker carlson, but I thought this is a noteworthy enough topic to get my attention. Like it or not, millions of people are going to watch this interview.
> Or is that geopolitically major dictatorship preparing to game twitter ahead of a major propaganda push?
Who cares if it is propaganda. This is going to be an opportunity to hear the president of the most talked about country speak about why people are talking about them.
It seems like he was stating a fact, that it is entertainment for many who watch. Most people are not going to take this information and do anything useful with it.
Regarding the psychopath comment, it seems like many more Ukrainians (and Russians) would be alive today if the US had not sent military aid to drag out the war.
You can argue that the invasion shouldn't have happened in the first place, but these geopolitical events happen for real reasons. Whether we think them just or not in our country, I think we have a duty to consider these and try to keep the peace and save human life, and not antagonize other countries for ideological or corrupt reasons.
In general, people believe it's best to hear both sides of a story before forming their opinion, if you're this worried that an interview with the other party has any kind of influence in a negative way it means you're doing a horrible job of communicating what you believe to be the truth.
Russian state modus operandi is the "Firehose of Falsehood" to sow division to achieve their aims. Post 2014 we've seen a deterioration in open communication channels into blatant falsehoods amplified by Russia's Internet Research Agency.
But sure, keep that same energy for the NYT softball interviewing Hitler to get his opinion on what Jews are doing wrong and why Poland started it. I'm sure most of the sub 100 IQ simpletons around you won't get swayed and vote to stay out of it, or worse, sow their own hate, no siree.
I didn’t say that I agreed with them. I developed a defense mechanism about 8 years ago that lets me enjoy the irony and humor in the absurd—and frankly, scary—times we live in without becoming too depressed. I donate money, vote, and stay educated, which I believe is the best way for me to contribute positively.
Yes, that's usually what interviews with presidents involves. People tuned in to watch George w bush too, and Netanyahu is also interviewed on tv. Do you think that interviews are endorsements? Because that's not the case.
We've banned this account for repeatedly posting flamewar comments and using HN primarily for ideological battle. That's not allowed here, regardless of what you're battling for or against.
If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future. They're here: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
Ok, but then again what do we earn from normalising the talking points of the other side ? You're adding shit to the shit pile, but it brings nothing to the table for "your" side
Not the person you replied to, but vilifying the other side is just adding fuel to the fire. Let's say your country and my country are at war. What has a better chance of achieving peace, 1) me saying that you're an evil dictator who does evil things because you're evil and probably insane, or 2) me saying that even though I disagree with you, things are not black and white and my side did some bad things to you too and looking for some reasonable compromise.
To me 1) only makes sense if I think I can defeat you militarily, which doesn't seem probable here. I guess 1) also makes sense if I don't want peace at all and don't care about how many people die, but I'm sure that's not the case.
Don't you want to know what the public position of a country is that we are so involved with? In what way is any politician not a liar in some respect? If you care about future geopolitical events then it's useful to know public positions.
Hearing the narrative being woven, true or false, directly from the source seems more useful than relying solely on another news outlet, which will add yet another layer of spin, on top of it.
The interview will undoubtedly color a lot of things going forward. To miss it is to lack context when reading any news that comes after it that relates to the conflict.
> an opportunity to hear the president of the most talked about country speak about why people are talking about them
Then educate yourself. Putin and all his apparatus have spoken at length about their motivations and their goals, in English. This is just more propaganda from a genocidal murderer under the veneer of a complacent "interview" by an American ally.
> Putin and all his apparatus have spoken at length about their motivations and their goals, in English
I'm sure they have, in the past. But this is today. Unless you have an interview with a better host that Putin will be attending right beforehand, though, I'm afraid this is what people will be watching. Personally I think it can be fascinating to listen to the enemy speak, even when we're aware they'll be mostly telling lies.
You've got to apply a pretty skeptical attitude towards this. Literally everyone associated with this has an incentive to inflate those numbers. For Russia/Putin it's a massive propaganda opportunity to sell the narrative. For Carlson it grants him relevance (somewhat temporarily, it kind of also puts him Musk's pocket too though), and for Musk he would hope the momentum helps the platform.
And this isn't our first rodeo. The article mentions that Mr Beast posted a video that netted him over $250k, but doesn't even bother to menion the second half Mr Beasts tweet - that he doesn't really think that number is representative because advertisers bought ads on it because it was getting traction. My bet is that it's simpler than that - Twitter paid out an eye catching number for the publicity. In the months since then Mr Beast hasn't continued posting, and no one is reporting making good money on the X platform.
I just think it'd be dump at this point to take anything Elon Musk does to market something at face value.
Or, more likely, people want to see the interview of a world leader by a well known and popular journalist, and it being on a site already used by hundreds of millions of people means word spreads easily.
Tucker Carlson is not, under any definition of the word, a journalist. This was stated under oath by Fox News lawyers themselves. Also, the Kremlin has refused all interviews by journalists (contrary to the lie spouted by Tucker Carlson himself) and is putting in prisons actual journalists.
If there weren't such a well documented and transparent history of X/Musk/Russia lying, misleading, bullshitting and manipulating then maybe we would believe that. But I wouldn't advise taking Russia's propagandists at face value.
Arguably, Trump had “a well documented history of lying, misleading, bullshitting, etc.”, and yet he was making a killing during his 2016 election run both for social media and the traditional media (cnn, nyt, etc.) companies. You couldn’t sneeze without seeing something about him somewhere.
Why? Because people actually tuned into this and wanted to see it, and the media companies are in the business of making money exactly off of that. Doesn’t matter if it is about lies or misleading statements or whatever. It is noteworthy enough and is of interest to people, so they will watch.
I don’t see how listing out all the ways in which both Carlson and Putin suck is somehow supposed to prove that this is all just bots and cannot be organic interest at all.
> in the months since Mr. Beast hasn’t continued posting…
In the one month (Jan 15, 2024) since, he has posted two full length videos he had previously released on Youtube onto X, ‘Train vs Giant Pit’ (two weeks ago) and ‘100 Abandoned Dogs’ (5 days ago). For the sake of an accurate and complete context, those were originally released to Youtube 7 months ago and 1 month ago respectively. Also of note that Mr. Beast is an active user and poster on X regardless of video content.
45 comments
[ 4.1 ms ] story [ 64.1 ms ] threadMusk has utterly failed in tamping out bots. Not only that, but it's even worse, with crumbling moderation and wrong incentives backed in.
None of the other stuff matters that much if X has some exclusive content that is of interest on the world stage.
Or is that geopolitically major dictatorship preparing to game twitter ahead of a major propaganda push?
> Or is that geopolitically major dictatorship preparing to game twitter ahead of a major propaganda push?
Who cares if it is propaganda. This is going to be an opportunity to hear the president of the most talked about country speak about why people are talking about them.
Regarding the psychopath comment, it seems like many more Ukrainians (and Russians) would be alive today if the US had not sent military aid to drag out the war.
You can argue that the invasion shouldn't have happened in the first place, but these geopolitical events happen for real reasons. Whether we think them just or not in our country, I think we have a duty to consider these and try to keep the peace and save human life, and not antagonize other countries for ideological or corrupt reasons.
But sure, keep that same energy for the NYT softball interviewing Hitler to get his opinion on what Jews are doing wrong and why Poland started it. I'm sure most of the sub 100 IQ simpletons around you won't get swayed and vote to stay out of it, or worse, sow their own hate, no siree.
If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future. They're here: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
To me 1) only makes sense if I think I can defeat you militarily, which doesn't seem probable here. I guess 1) also makes sense if I don't want peace at all and don't care about how many people die, but I'm sure that's not the case.
I don't use X, but I will be watching the interview. I'm just interested, it has my attention. Plain and simple
You make it sound more intriguing if you put it that way.
The interview will undoubtedly color a lot of things going forward. To miss it is to lack context when reading any news that comes after it that relates to the conflict.
Then educate yourself. Putin and all his apparatus have spoken at length about their motivations and their goals, in English. This is just more propaganda from a genocidal murderer under the veneer of a complacent "interview" by an American ally.
I'm sure they have, in the past. But this is today. Unless you have an interview with a better host that Putin will be attending right beforehand, though, I'm afraid this is what people will be watching. Personally I think it can be fascinating to listen to the enemy speak, even when we're aware they'll be mostly telling lies.
From bots and engagement farms, indeed
And this isn't our first rodeo. The article mentions that Mr Beast posted a video that netted him over $250k, but doesn't even bother to menion the second half Mr Beasts tweet - that he doesn't really think that number is representative because advertisers bought ads on it because it was getting traction. My bet is that it's simpler than that - Twitter paid out an eye catching number for the publicity. In the months since then Mr Beast hasn't continued posting, and no one is reporting making good money on the X platform.
I just think it'd be dump at this point to take anything Elon Musk does to market something at face value.
Why? Because people actually tuned into this and wanted to see it, and the media companies are in the business of making money exactly off of that. Doesn’t matter if it is about lies or misleading statements or whatever. It is noteworthy enough and is of interest to people, so they will watch.
I don’t see how listing out all the ways in which both Carlson and Putin suck is somehow supposed to prove that this is all just bots and cannot be organic interest at all.
In the one month (Jan 15, 2024) since, he has posted two full length videos he had previously released on Youtube onto X, ‘Train vs Giant Pit’ (two weeks ago) and ‘100 Abandoned Dogs’ (5 days ago). For the sake of an accurate and complete context, those were originally released to Youtube 7 months ago and 1 month ago respectively. Also of note that Mr. Beast is an active user and poster on X regardless of video content.
Why did you think something completely different?