Why the Guardian is no longer posting on X
Why the Guardian is no longer posting on X
We will stop posting from our official editorial accounts on the platform, but X users can still share our articles
no paywall
Reposting this here from the discussion in !news@lemmy.world:
There's a real argument for a Mastodon use case for news organizations, governments, and colleges.
If they're just seeking engagement, then they have to wait for the platform to grow. But this isn't about that.
Many news organizations already have comment sections on their website, and they want to push out information on breaking news as quickly as possible. They need a platform to do those things. So, a lot of them use Facebook for embedded comments on the page and Xitter to breaking news. The thing is that they could use mastodon for both, and run their own instance, which would give them total control and not be at the mercy of Musk or Zuck.
Colleges use expensive proprietary messaging apps for students, clubs, and teachers that they can monitor and adjust to fit their needs. Mastodon offers that.
Governments sometimes end up in legal hot water due to freedom of information, etc. that comes with corporate social media. Mastodon offers the freedoms and controls necessary to disseminate vital information and to allow or reject posts as required by local laws.
The point is that Mastodon is an effective public facing communication system that also allows internal controls by the host.
The only publicity and marketing budget that the fediverse has is us, so any opportunity to promote it is our job. Government, education, news. These are the vital areas to promote.
There's no need for mastodon to be in the mix here, whatever software they are using can federate directly. I know wordpress already has a plugin to do exactly that. (I have no idea what CMS major news outlets use, hopefully not wordpress)
For the news articles themselves, each of the major companies is using a major CMS system, many of them developed in house or licensed from another major media organization.
But for things like journalist microblogging, Mastodon seems like a stand-in replacement for Twitter or Threads or Bluesky, that could theoretically integrate with their existing authentication/identity/account management system that they use to provide logins, email, intranet access, publishing rights on whatever CMS they do have, etc.
Same with universities. Sure, each department might have official webpages, but why not provide faculty and students with the ability to engage on a university-hosted service like Mastodon or Lemmy?
Governments (federal, state, local) could do the same thing with official communications.
It could be like the old days of email, where people got their public facing addresses from their employer or university, and then were able to use that address relatively freely, including for personal use in many instances. In a sense, the domain/instance could show your association with that domain owner (a university or government or newspaper or company), but you were still speaking as yourself when using that service.
What proprietary messaging for colleges? Lol
YikYak, GroupMe, Ready Education, Remind, UniBuddy, Viva, etc. Etc.
They could spin up a Mastodon instance, but given how lousy their UK editorial department is with TERFs, it would be justifiably blocked for transphobia.
I really enjoy quite a bit of the Guardians coverage. Their staff editorial department is often infuriating to the point I often wonder if they actually work for a different news agency.
Their US and Australian divisions are solid. The UK one varies, and has some decent people, but also has a persistent infestation of TERF/SWERFs. A few high-profile ones have left after their comments became irreconcilable with the paper’s ostensibly liberal/progressive line, but you still get regular Observer opinion columns about pronoun-mongers sexualising our children or other scare campaigns. There’s a rumour that the editor, Kath Viner, is herself a TERF and personally protecting them, though I haven’t seen any evidence one way or the other.
I really wish running your own mastodon was as accepted as running your own email server. There'll be no "blue check mark" problem if your company runs the server and only provides accounts to employees.
That's exactly right.
This seems like a win-win scenario for everyone involved.
They don't need to do any of that. Just make an account on any instance and go forth.
If you can leave X, you can change instances if needed in the future, too.
Tbh that would put a lot of strain on someone else’s server. It’s not like they’re a small business that can’t afford a dedicated server, and each journalist could have a dedicated handle
Oh gee I don’t know, maybe because it’s a shit platform run by a petulant man child.
"no paywall"?
there never was a paywall on tG, no?
No. The have nag screens for donations, but they don't block on principle.
disable JavaScript?
no, I'm very certain I've never seen one, this article certainly doesn't have one
me neither. never
For me, the page doesn't allow me to scroll past the first sentence of the article.
Maybe it's because I'm using mobile Firefox with uBO? I only managed to read the article through here.
i'm on mull with ubo and i can read the whole article 🤷
Guardian have a paywall for their mobile app, you get a quota of articles per week.
However the website which is almost identical is unlimited
Not a paywall you have to pay with money per se, but they require you to have an account and be logged in to fully see a profile, a post and its comments. Same goes for Facebook.
Bluesky is the most downloaded social app at the moment. How they can handle the influx
Wise choice!
Should have stayed on until musk booted them. Missed opportunity. Also X needs more counter-content, not less.
Years too late from the hand wringers
phyrric. barn doors and horses spring to mind.
came here to post this
To Mend and Defend, eh?
A couple of years late, but OK.