Reporters Without Borders sues X (www.voanews.com)
from Joker@sh.itjust.works to technology@lemmy.world on 14 Nov 22:16
https://sh.itjust.works/post/28103247

#technology

threaded - newest

LEVI@feddit.org on 14 Nov 22:26 next collapse

This is going to be good

WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world on 15 Nov 00:44 collapse

Trump will designate Reporters Without Borders a terrorist org, and terrorize their reporters using the state.

stoly@lemmy.world on 15 Nov 01:11 collapse

They aren’t in the United States. This lawsuit is in France.

jaybone@lemmy.world on 15 Nov 01:25 next collapse

He can still deploy Seal Team.

stoly@lemmy.world on 15 Nov 01:34 collapse

To go after a loose group of reporters from different countries?

jaybone@lemmy.world on 15 Nov 01:38 collapse

I’m just pointing out how he could do the thing that person you originally replied to was suggesting. I’m not saying it makes sense or is reasonable.

Deebster@infosec.pub on 15 Nov 02:32 collapse

makes sense or is reasonable

That’s getting less and less relevant every day.

AmidFuror@fedia.io on 15 Nov 01:54 next collapse

They don't have borders, so eventually they will come to the US.

WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world on 15 Nov 13:22 collapse

It’s cute you think fascists care about borders, and that the US doesn’t have a history of persecuting foreign political opposition.

What are you, 12?

stoly@lemmy.world on 15 Nov 15:47 collapse

It’s cute how you made it personal for no reason.

homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world on 14 Nov 23:09 next collapse

The press freedom group Reporters Without Borders on Thursday announced that it is suing the social media company X, accusing it of spreading disinformation.

After Reporters Without Borders, or RSF, discovered that it was the target of a disinformation campaign this past summer, the Paris-based group filed 10 reports of policy violations with X, formerly known as Twitter.

Since none of the posts in question have been removed, RSF opted to sue the company in French courts “for its complicity in disseminating false information, misrepresentation and identity theft,” the group said in a statement.

Ghoelian@lemmy.dbzer0.com on 14 Nov 23:54 next collapse

Ok maybe a very stupid question but

The press freedom group Reporters Without Borders on Thursday announced

Isn’t that gramatically incorrect? Shouldn’t it be “The press freedom group Reporters Without Borders announced on Thursday”?

I see this kind of writing a lot in news articles so surely it’s not actually wrong, but that’s not how I was taught English writing.

loppy@fedia.io on 15 Nov 00:17 next collapse

Idk if you're a native speaker or not, but as a native speaker of American English there is absolutely nothing wrong with this to me. You could put it in about 4 different places:

On Thursday the press freedom group Reporters Without Borders announced ____.

The press freedom group Reporters Without Borders on Thursday announced ____.

The press freedom group Reporters Without Borders announced on Thursday that ____.

The press freedom group Reporters Without Borders announced ____ on Thursday.

The first one typically has a comma after "Thursday". The second one you could offset "on Thursday" with commas. The third one is at best really awkward without a "that" or a question word (who, what, where, why, how) and you could offset "on Thursday"
with commas; you can also drop the "on", in which case you can't use commas. The last one is possible but could be ambiguous (it could be that "on Thursday" is part of their announcement).

Deebster@infosec.pub on 15 Nov 00:32 next collapse

It’s a bit stilted and no-one would speak like that (at least without sounding pretentious), but it’s not bad grammar.

Also, shame on the moron that downvoted you for asking a question.

loppy@fedia.io on 15 Nov 01:13 collapse

I really don't see why you would think this.

Sooooo, Carl, on Thursday, said that...

Completely normal thing I would expect to hear.

essteeyou@lemmy.world on 15 Nov 01:37 next collapse

Unnatural to me, that sounds.

Deebster@infosec.pub on 15 Nov 02:07 next collapse

To be fair, you’ve added commas which makes it a parenthetical phrase. But yeah - people do speak like this in real life; technically, I should have said no-one speaks like this in non-impromptu speech without sounding stilted.

“Carl said on Thursday” is definitely more idiomatic (to my BrE ears, anyway) than “Carl on Thursday said”.

loppy@fedia.io on 15 Nov 02:25 collapse

Yeah, I'll agree, without any pauses it's less natural and it's more of a "buying time to think" thing.

LustyArgonianMana@lemmy.world on 15 Nov 03:49 collapse

Yeah just depends what you’re emphasizing. It could be that Thursday is particularly important so it gets moved up to the second piece of info delivered

stoly@lemmy.world on 15 Nov 01:09 next collapse

Dialect variation. For me, saying “the car needs washed” sounds truly strange but millions and millions of people say it. You’re experiencing similar with this phrase.

loppy@fedia.io on 15 Nov 02:30 next collapse

I believe you, I had just never heard it was "wrong" and it's never stood out to me.

stoly@lemmy.world on 15 Nov 03:41 collapse

Funny enough I learned about it in a linguistics class from a professor out of Michigan. Never heard the concept before and I think a lot of people had their minds blown.

ValenThyme@reddthat.com on 15 Nov 02:43 next collapse

‘chest of draws’ was a weird one for me!

Reyali@lemm.ee on 16 Nov 18:04 collapse

But that’s just a ‘bone apple tea’ of “chest of drawers”? It’s not a correct term.

(I figured surely there’s an actual word for misheard terms being butchered in writing, but a quick search failed me so I went with the colloquial name.)

badgermurphy@lemmy.world on 16 Nov 18:36 collapse

There’s “malapropism” that is sort of close, but even that is more like accidentally combining parts of two idioms.

It was named after a character in a play that always did it.

JWBananas@lemmy.world on 15 Nov 04:30 collapse

the car needs washed

Is there a name/term for this abomination? I’ve only ever heard one person speak in that form (omitting “to be”), and it has haunted me ever since.

stoly@lemmy.world on 16 Nov 02:08 collapse

I think you’d call this elision. Assume that the phrase is originally “the car needs to be washed” but you cut out “to be”, making it into a shorter form. It’s pretty common in language to shorten things to make it faster to speak. Think of the endless contractions in English or perhaps leaving part of a sentence completely unspoken because the content is easily assumed by the interlocutors.

JWBananas@lemmy.world on 16 Nov 06:30 collapse

Worse, to me, is that there is a perfectly grammatically correct way to be just as brief.

Wrong:

The bed sheets need washed.

Right:

The bed sheets need washing.

stoly@lemmy.world on 16 Nov 17:49 collapse

And for a linguist the question is really whether there are native speakers who consider it correct. Here there are millions who say yes.

deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz on 15 Nov 03:46 next collapse

It’s correct, as much as any English is correct, but not typically spoken naturally like that.

The press (newspapers) has an idiosyncratic grammar, probably born of maximising space in a newspaper column. Headlines are often grammatical nightmares, body copy less so.

One could think of it as a form of semantic compression.

echodot@feddit.uk on 15 Nov 13:48 collapse

A good example of this is their insistence on using the comma, to mean “the”, “of” or “and”, leading to some bizarre headlines.

Midland, Baker, Roz, Mazda, convicted, fraud

Which despite the fact it just sounds like a list of random words, is in fact a valid sentence. Or at least it represents one.

deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz on 15 Nov 18:50 collapse

Though today we get:

Find out what these big four names were convicted of!

ulterno@programming.dev on 15 Nov 08:39 collapse

Had they just used some punctuation - “The press freedom group Reporters Without Borders on Thursday, announced”, it would have made it easier to get. Even, “The press freedom group Reporters Without Borders, on Thursday, announced” would be doable.

How do these feel?

spacecadet@lemm.ee on 15 Nov 02:46 collapse

I think they have to sue in French court, right? Couldn’t X just “Section 230” them to no end if they sue in America? Ironically, Trump wants to repeal 230 and claim Platforms are actually publishers, but I guess he wants to do that to silence his critics and no real concern for disinformation.

Kecessa@sh.itjust.works on 15 Nov 03:43 collapse

They’re suing in French court.

shittydwarf@lemmy.dbzer0.com on 14 Nov 23:28 collapse

X, is that Musk’s new fascist website?

masterofn001@lemmy.ca on 15 Nov 03:36 next collapse

X marks the spot Nazi.

MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml on 15 Nov 11:20 collapse

Xitter.