zlacker

It is clear that Taibbi et al. are cherry-picking FBI interactions that will draw the most clicks and outrage from fans of the new management.

If they had published communications between the FBI and Twitter from, say, June 2020, I imagine their audience would not be able to muster quite as much indignation.

>>kweing+(OP)
His story is slanted, but it's not fair to suggest he is 'cherry picking' - that's what the press does, they 'find the stuff that matters' and filters out the stuff that does not.

It would be 'cherry picking' if the result was something out of context and therefore misrepresented.

There's a legit story here, probably not to the extent made out to be but it's newsworthy.

What could be 'cherry picking' in the grand context, is that SpaceX has 'deep ties' with state apparatus, even the military, and we just don't talk about that. So by highlighting 'this thing over here' and not 'that thing over there' we lose context that Musk is in bed with the Pentagon while lambasting something happening with the FBI. And I'm not suggesting working with either is wrong, but that it's a bit hypocritical.

>>kweing+(OP)
I Can't wait for the Twitter Drops covering the last week or two.

>>jasmer+zb
Musk is the one cherry picking by choosing which data journalists get. Taibbi alleges that the Biden Campaign was censoring content but leaves out that it was revenge porn. He says the Trump team made requests for removal of other content but leaves those out entirely. Bari Weiss was given an incomplete dataset which showed only Democratic messages but left out those from Republicans. There’s more, but that’s not enough cherry picking to make the entire thing dubious.

>>Modern+tm
Yes, this is fair.