Post AU1Bs7EoSLwSWcYElM by algernon@journa.host
 (DIR) More posts by algernon@journa.host
 (DIR) Post #AU1BrxiZqpoD02Orlg by algernon@journa.host
       2023-03-26T14:20:54Z
       
       0 likes, 1 repeats
       
       In December, Twitter infamously banned at least 10 accounts of reporters who reported about Elon Musk’s behavior and the Elonjet account among other things. Some were told they would be fully reinstated only if they deleted tweets Musk did not like. All of them, except apparently @micahflee, are back posting frequently on #Twitter. @w7voa wrote a substack about it but doesn’t disclose whether he censored himself in order to return.
       
 (DIR) Post #AU1BrzTPKCrYRZJmOu by algernon@journa.host
       2023-03-26T14:33:06Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       Bending the knee like this to a website’s owner brings up some important questions about journalistic ethics, beginning with the decision to give that kind of deference to the owner when it comes to reporting about him. What’s clear enough is that reporters can move their work elsewhere and stop contributing to #Twitter’s bottom line. These reporters simply don’t want to. That’s an ethical decision, and it’s not being widely discussed.
       
 (DIR) Post #AU1Bs1N6Gd0QKaNlqa by algernon@journa.host
       2023-03-26T14:40:29Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       It’s not even like the old problem of upsetting an advertiser. It’s a decision to acquiesce to the demands of Elon Musk because they buy into the idea that #Twitter is indispensable to #journalism. Which is not only a false proposition, it’s ethically unsound — especially with what I presume is a capitulation to Musk’s demand that he be allowed to censor reporting. Truth is, as far as making Twitter so giant we have much to answer for ourselves.
       
 (DIR) Post #AU1Bs38HigLLnDSy24 by algernon@journa.host
       2023-03-26T14:47:40Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       In December, the Society of Professional Journalists reacted to Musk’s action by stating, “The SPJ Code of Ethics states journalists must hold those in power accountable, while still minimizing harm. This includes reporting in real time and engaging directly with the public they serve. Twitter's action affects all journalists and goes against Musk's promise to uphold free speech on the platform.” I would argue acquiescing is a violation of that ethic.
       
 (DIR) Post #AU1Bs4x0xYW5QqCzk8 by algernon@journa.host
       2023-03-26T14:58:24Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       Besides ethics, what about the bottom line? When I worked for #Gannett, we were encouraged to watch our metrics. One thing I noticed: #Twitter engagement pretty much stayed on Twitter, where my stories were concerned. Compared to Facebook, the percentage of people opening stories from Twitter was minuscule. Twitter is about Twitter. It’s a community where these people simply want to hang out because they’re used to it — and to promote themselves.
       
 (DIR) Post #AU1Bs7EoSLwSWcYElM by algernon@journa.host
       2023-03-26T15:01:54Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       To be clear, I don’t think the decision to stay is purely craven. I think the fear of the unknown, and the pressure to have a prominent online presence, are major drivers. That’s what I get from @w7voa’s essay. Fear makes it hard to make clear ethical choices. That’s a human vulnerability. Yet, with kindness, I would urgently submit that we still need to think about this ethically. Otherwise, what are we about? What are we here to do?