GRAUNIAD HAS A SAD OVER ELON MUSK AND THE BAD ORANGE MAN: The Guardian’s Retreat from the Battlefield of Ideas.
It was quite the flounce. “This is something we have been considering for a while,” The Guardian intoned with the gravity of an Old Testament prophet as it declared in an editorial that the organization would no longer post on X. “The U.S. presidential election campaign served only to underline what we have considered for a long time: that X is a toxic media platform and that its owner, Elon Musk, has been able to use its influence to shape political discourse.”
Other users have followed suit, with an exodus of accounts from X to Bluesky, a social media platform that resembles in style the pre-Musk Twitter. Taylor Swift fans are flocking in their thousands, and former CNN anchor Don Lemon posted a lengthy statement outlining his own reasons for relocating. Even the official account of the Clifton Suspension Bridge and Museum in the United Kingdom posted a similar statement, which has led to candlelit vigils and a mass outpouring of public grief.
After The Guardian’s announcement, many users were quick to point out that misinformation, far from being the publication’s chief concern, appears to be its specialty. Since Musk has introduced “Community Notes” to X, journalists who post falsehoods or misleading articles have quickly been corrected. Inevitably, The Guardian has been slapped with Community Notes on numerous occasions, which might help explain its decision to withdraw. On its website, The Guardian proudly boasts that it “delivers fearless, investigative journalism—giving a voice to the powerless and holding power to account.” But whether its executives admit it or not, the publication has developed a reputation for extreme ideological bias.
The frequent “Community-Noting” on X suggests that this reputation is not unfounded. For instance, when The Guardian posted a piece entitled “England Riots: How Has ‘Two-Tier Policing’ Myth Become Widespread?,” notes were quickly added to provide links to the various articles in which The Guardian has asserted that “two-tier policing” based on race and sexuality is rife. When it published an article entitled “How Many More Children like Sara Sharif Will Be Killed Before Smacking Is Banned?,” the Community Notes quickly explained that the victim had not merely been “smacked,” but had suffered extreme beatings and multiple forms of torture. All such hideous acts are, of course, already illegal.
Which is why those who write the Grauniad would rather silo themselves with their fellow leftists than compete in an open marketplace of ideas:
Wow. CNN admits that @X now represents the average ideological makeup of the US better than it ever did before @elonmusk bought it. Incredible to see them admit this after all the fearmongering they pushed about X since Elon bought it.pic.twitter.com/BzYUxApUoq
— Robby Starbuck (@robbystarbuck) November 19, 2024