NJ's vaccination rollout has been so F'd up. These accounts are needed only because signing up is impossible. Govts should be actively reaching out to & signing up underserved communities; it's their fault. nj.com/coronavirus/20…
This article enraged my wife, who spent a few weeks doing everything possible to get extended family who were eligible vaccine appointments. She was able to only with the advice of volunteers on Twitter & Facebook, who are criticized in the report. 1/
My wife texted: "Inner city issues are transportation to the site, getting time off work, returning for 2nd dose, vaccine hesitancy. They need to get it to community centers, churches, local pharmacies. I think without the J&J it's harder to serve these populations." 2/
She added: "Also undocumented no id no insurance are fearful. Not supposed to get turned away or id'd but some places are checking.
Fix these problems before blaming people on the internet for just trying to help." 3/
My wife should tweet.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I far prefer blogs to email newsletters & podcasts, which are about creator control, walled gardens of a sort. Blogs are open & thrive on links & conversation. Newsletters & podcasts are creators demanding attention: editorial ego & entitlement, no? 1/ nytimes.com/2021/04/11/bus…
I know, I'll be accused of being an old-fart blogger. Stipulated. I confess Twitter ruined me as a blogger & I don't pay the attention to mine I used to. Still, I appreciate and miss the generosity, collaboration, conversation of the form. 2/
Before you @ me--I know you will--there are newsletters I love, subscribe to & pay for & podcasts I subscribe to & support. I'm a podcaster myself (@TWiT). I'm not decrying all newsletters & podcasts. Instead I'm lamenting a loss & worrying about a stampede & a glut. 3/
No, The Times own version of its strategy is flawed. Without the huge audience that free brought, The Times would not have been able to convert the number of readers it has to subscription. nytimes.com/2021/04/10/bus…
See: digitalriptide.org/chapter-4-the-…
Later, the same story demonstrates the point: You have to have large sampling (read: free) to convert people to subs (read: paid).
Frustrating that the story about the WSJ barely touches the GOP elephant in the room: Murdoch's politics and the right's racism. This is his bully pulpit. nytimes.com/2021/04/10/bus…
Interesting. German lawyer and writer Ferdinand von Schirach (grandson of Baldur) proposes six new fundamental rights for EU citizens. Let's review. 1/ you.wemove.eu/campaigns/for-…
Article 1: Agree.
Article 2: What does "digital self-determination" mean? What is "harvesting" data other than emotional reference? What amounts to manipulation: education? religion? propaganda? fraud? Where is the line? 2/
Article 3: Human beings must make key decisions? What are key decisions? Algorithms make decisions about air traffic control, investment, and so on. Humans aren't capable of calculating some choices. This is another emotional characterization. It is a symptom of moral panic. 3/
Hey, @Morning_Joe: The standard is not Nate Cohn's turnout prediction. It is not other states' bad laws (e.g. NY & absentee ballots). The standard is whether *every* vote is valued and made as easy to cast as possible.
Here is what Georgia's voting law does. It makes absentee voting harder. It reduces drop boxes. It lets the state overrule local officials. And, yes, it dehydrates voters in lines that should never exist. nytimes.com/2021/04/02/us/…
New York is not the standard for voting, @JoeNBC. New Jersey, however, mailed absentee ballots to every voter and had drop boxes everywhere. Sadly, NJ, is not going to maintain that standard. It should.
After conspiring with the most malign influence in democracy in the English-speaking world, named Murdoch, the country is now considering licensing social-media users and eliminating anonymity. So wrong. WTF is going on down there, Australia?
When I cry "moral panic" about media & government treatment of the internet, this is what I fear. I don't care about FB, Google, et al; they take care of themselves. I fear efforts by vestigial power-elites to control or eliminate the freedoms the net brings to the rest of us.
Media and government want to control speech on the net--directly & by attacking tech companies--because the voices of the people challenge the legacy institutions these self-declared elites still control. This is a moral panic of their invention.
Facebook head of policy & PR @nick_clegg responds to moral panic about the net, saying we do have agency. I agree.
But I hate this sentence: "Should governments set out what kinds of conversation citizens are allowed to participate in?" Don't even ask.
He also says: "The internet needs new rules — designed and agreed by democratically elected institutions..." This is FB's stand lately: Please regulate us. I worry about that regulatory capture & how it will impact new & small competitors. I worry about over-regulation.
But I do agree with @nick_clegg that we do have agency on the net, that personalization has benefits over mass media, and especially that media have responsibility for polarization and disinformation (which media, of course, ignore in their moral panic against the net).