Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

vineyardmike t1_j228ecr wrote

Reply to comment by Responsible-Type-392 in Projection on Twitter HQ in San Francisco by AEMarling

The difference is that Wapo stayed the same. Who knows what's going on with Twitter now? Maybe it's all some weird April fool's joke.

7

jubbergun t1_j24iugz wrote

> Who knows what's going on with Twitter now?

Everyone could know if they wanted to know, since Musk released the company's internal communications to a bunch of independent journalists. Between that and the constant media attention over every little thing he's done since he bought the company if you have no idea what is and has been going on with Twitter it's because you're not availing yourself of the available information resources.

1

Responsible-Type-392 t1_j2295k9 wrote

Incorrect. It drastically changed in both its coverage and content - that was a scheme devised by Bezos for the company to turn a profit.

What’s going on with Twitter now? Don’t know, don’t care. Wasn’t a great company to begin with.

−12

BILOXII-BLUE t1_j22bum2 wrote

>that was a scheme devised by Bezos for the company to turn a profit.

What scheme, to charge a monthly subscription fee gasp? Nothing else has changed

5

Responsible-Type-392 t1_j22byoa wrote

You don’t know what you’re talking about. Please don’t comment on things you don’t know about.

−20

vineyardmike t1_j22a8g6 wrote

I only read the ny times before so no idea about wapo.

Twitter seems like it's just a place to hear what "influencers" want to broadcast to the world in 280 character snippets. I'm not into celebrities and influencers so I'll pass.

2