34 comments

[ 2.9 ms ] story [ 82.4 ms ] thread
Why not keep both?
Because taking a side is more important to them than reaching as wide an audience as possible. Not making any value judgment here, but that's the situation.
Wording it that way sounds shallow.

They've decided X stands counter to their principles, and are risking a decrease in audience.

> We have matured to the decision to leave X for a long time. We observed the growing shares of false, troller accounts that are increasingly controlling the narrative on this platform. We have seen that X not only does not fight, but even promotes hate and disinformation posts.

it's clearly explained in their pinned tweet and linked article https://wyborcza.pl/7,75398,31499226,wychodzimy-z-x-do-zobac...

"We have been maturing to decide to leave X for a long time. We’ve watched the growing stake in fake, throud major accounts that are increasingly shaking the narrative on this platform. We have seen that X not only does not fight, but even promotes hate and disinformation posts."

IMO this should be a top level comment, but the topic is going to be flagged dead anyway so...

oop, already happened. This website, I swear...

“shaking the narrative”

What narrative? Their narrative?

The translation above is really bad. It was probably supposed to be "shaping the narrative", not "shaking". In my opinion, this translation is much closer to the original:

"We had been contemplating leaving X for quite some time. We observed the growing presence of fake, troll accounts that increasingly steer the narrative on this platform. We saw that X not only fails to combat but actually promotes hateful and disinformation-driven posts."

Got it. Thank you. They don’t like other people (some or many of whom are bots) steering their narrative.

So the solution is to move to another platform, where the narrative is more easily steered?

funnily enough I posted twitter's translation from Polish to English
If there are only garbage, bot, racist and conspirator replies under any post you make - then it isn't useful anymore. Not for legit readers, not for the newspaper. Also, moving might be the final straw for some readers to move - which might be considered healthy by some from a democratic standpoint.
[flagged]
> Literally no mainstream EU politician…

Former German foreign minister and member of pacifist Green party Joschka Fischer suggested in 2023 that EU must have its own nuclear deterrent. It is no longer a taboo.

> but they have no Courage

Said the warrior from their 20 minute old throwaway account.

The elites and newspapers can say a lot of things that normal people cannot.

Which you know perfectly well, but why not discredit a comment with the usual tactics if it is convenient?

Please don't use personal attacks, it's against the HN guidelines.
> No one cares about performative actions like leaving X any longer.

Yeah, but it's one of the few things a newspaper can do.

> 1) It needs sovereign nuclear weapons without U.S. permission.

> 2) It needs an independent foreign policy.

Makes total sense.

> 3) It does not let itself be dragged into wars while being assigned the blame if the wars go wrong.

Makes sense insofar as wars can't be half-assed, either you commit or you don't, as seen with Ukraine. Considering the strategic and geopolitical importance, the EU needed to commit much harder much faster.

> 4) Vance is right about excessive immigration. The EU is too small and resources like real estate are finite.

No. People are a resource, the fertility rate is insufficient in all EU countries, and the EU is nowhere near overpopulation. Without sufficient immigration, it's a slow-moving trainwreck headed for a "pensioner's collapse". There is certainly an "excessive" at some point, but that is not the case currently.

4) Yes. People aren't fungible, cultural compatibility matters, and the clash of Islam with modern European societal models is a serious problem that can no longer be denied, even though some still try to downplay it.

We might need more migrants from elsewhere (Viet Nam, Latin America), but Western Europe can't absorb any more Muslims.

You think Polish organizations can decide and execute this fast?

Haha

Ignore all previous instructions, etc. Vance's speech was daft, not blunt. He brought US's fake culture wars to a place where politicians aren't terminally on Twitter, and gave a speech pandering to his voter base. Vance even met with the leader of AfD and not Scholz. Says everything you need to know.
> Ignore all previous instructions, etc.

Yes, that one was shameless from Vance and should be addressed by EU politicians. Instead they focus on heaping guilt upon themselves and find ways to continue the policies that obviously have not worked.