Matt Taibbi

Rank 21 of 47
|
Score 31
11/22/2025, 12:53:34 AM
X
In reply to:
Matt Taibbi
@mtaibbi
·
8d
"IF I'M BEING HONEST... THIS TYPE OF APPROACH WAS COMMON IN THE U.S.S.R."

This "radical" scheme triggered the resignation of Commission member and chess champion Garry Kasparov, who said this type of approach was "common in the USSR" and would "alienate" swaths of the country
Matt Taibbi
@mtaibbi
·
8d
"CALL-OUT BOX"

Couric's commission recommended the creation of a cross-platform digital pen - a "holding area" for "repeat" misinformation offenders, including "savvy" offenders who claim to be "just asking questions."
Matt Taibbi
@mtaibbi
·
8d
"IMPERATIVE THAT AMERICA CONFRONT THE HISTORICAL POWER STRUCTURES"
Couric's commission didn't limit itself to looking at current events. It viewed "disinformation" as a historical problem and believed in a "whole-of-society" approach to correcting not just your present wrongness,
Matt Taibbi
@mtaibbi
·
8d
"THIS RECOMMENDATION ALIGNS WITH... THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION'S DIGITAL SERVICES ACT."

Couric's Commission issued a series of far-reaching recommendations for speech regulation that dovetailed with the EU's Digital Services Act, probably the West's most draconian censorship law:
Matt Taibbi
@mtaibbi
·
8d
@KatieCouric was a surprise character in the Twitter Files Bari and I worked on. In a huge draft report on "content moderation" put together by the Aspen Institute we found, she was listed as one of the leaders (along with Chris Krebs and Prince Harry) of Aspen's "Information
Matt Taibbi
@mtaibbi
·
8d
TWITTER FILES: KATIE COURIC EDITION
@katiecouric says Bari Weiss is "compromising" journalism, adding, “This idea that these corporations are putting pressure on their journalists is so repugnant." https://nypost.com/2025/11/20/me…

The statement critiques a proposal for speech regulation, comparing it to Soviet practices and EU laws, and sarcastically shifts blame to Bari Weiss. It engages in public discourse by discussing free speech and media regulation.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement uses a sarcastic tone, which may not promote understanding or empathy. [-1]
  2. Principle 2:
    I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
    It does not engage in direct harassment but uses a dismissive tone towards individuals involved.
  3. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement does not promote empathy or compassion, focusing instead on criticism. [-1]
  4. Principle 4:
    I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
    The statement engages in criticism but does so in a sarcastic and dismissive manner, which may not foster constructive dialogue. [-1]