NPR’s account is labeled as state-affiliated media

Twitter’s policy against state-affiliated news media is not a label applied to the New York Public Radio Radio Review (NPR)

Twitter’s policy describes state-affiliated media as “outlets where the state exercises control over editorial content through financial resources, direct or indirect political pressures, and/or control over production and distribution.”

The abrupt appearance of the same label affixed to known propaganda outlets, such as Russia’s Tass and China’s People’s Daily, set off a range of reactions. Critics of the move saw it as another sign of Twitter’s troubled relationship with the media, which has deteriorated since billionaire Elon Musk bought Twitter last year.

“State-financed media organizations with editorial independence, like the BBC in the UK or NPR in the US for example, are not defined as state-affiliated media for the purposes of this policy,” the document said.

Noting the millions of listeners who support and rely upon NPR for “independent, fact-based journalism,” NPR CEO John Lansing stated, “NPR stands for freedom of speech and holding the powerful accountable. It is unacceptable for Twitter to label us this way. A vigorous, vibrant free press is essential to the health of our democracy.”

NPR officials asked the social network to take down the label. They initially assumed it was applied by mistake, NPR spokesperson Isabel Lara said. We were not told about it. It happened suddenly last night,” she said.

In response to an NPR email for this story seeking comment and requesting details about what in particular might have led to the new designation, the company’s press account auto-replied with a poop emoji — a message it has been sending to journalists for weeks.

Jean-Pierre left NPR in response to Musk’s comments about the equivalency between news outlets and editorial control by the government

Jean-Pierre said there is no doubt about the independence of NPR journalists. “If you’ve ever been on the receiving end of their questions, you know this.”

He said he left the platform because of the way it was being undermined. He sees something more sinister.

“Establishing a false equivalency between public broadcasters and editorial control of media by government is misleading,” he said, “and undermines the essential work of providing transparency about state-backed propaganda efforts around the world.”

A scientist from the University of Maryland warns that the move could muddy the water in a news environment where it is hard to decipher which outlets are reliable and have editorial independence.

Twitter stripped the New York Times of its verified blue check. And in December, Musk suspended the accounts of several high-profile journalists who shared tweets or reported on an account that tracked the comings and going of his private jet.

Musk, in another email, compared NPR to media outlets controlled by governments of other countries, while also admitting “it sounds like” that might not be the case.

In response to Musk’s comments, NPR gave him public documentation of the network’s financial situation, showing that 40% of funding comes from corporate sponsorship and 31% from fees for local public radio stations.

PEN America said in a statement that the label given to NPR was no laughing matter to free press watchers who viewed it as a dangerous move that could undermine public confidence in reliable news sources.

The People’s Daily in China, and Sputnik and RT in Russia, for instance, received the labels, but outlets with editorial autonomy that received some government funding did not.

“In the end, [we] felt that the most fair and balanced way to implement labels was to call out state connections that had a demonstrated track record of influencing content of news reporting,” the former Twitter executive said.

That meant that NPR, the government-funded outlet Voice of America, “and even Al Jazeera didn’t quality under our designation,” the former employee said.

“That matters a lot when you see an outlet like Xinhua, have never heard of it, and it looks like a totally legit news source,” the former executive said about the state news agency that routinely pushes the official line of China’s President Xi Jinping.

According to the former executive, a account that has been given the state-affiliated mark is not recommended on the platform or amplified, even though they have been given the state-affiliated mark.