Brian Reed

Why the BBC claims it had “no choice” but to nix a film about Gaza. Let’s parse their reasoning.

Read the full sitch here 🔗: open.substack.com/pub/question...

I found the response the BBC gave to our reporting about the Gaza documentary they killed to be incredible. In what world does the BBC not have a choice about what to run or not? In what world does it not have a choice over what its own editorial and ethical policies are?

Link ⬇️

I gotcha

Yes to be clear, I'm not proposing government fines or regulation. That, to me, is the elegance of this solution. It's *removing* a regulation -- by stripping away a special subsidy the govt has bestowed upon only tech platforms -- and forcing their business models to adapt to market forces.

Their business models are built on this special liability shield in Section 230 that no other industry gets. We've seen the business model is harmful. Let's bring them on an even playing field with all other media.

It's not a fine. They'd be exposed to lawsuits from those who are defamed. Most lies are not defamatory -- 99% of lies are protected speech. But for defamatory lies -- like against Dominion Voting Systems Sandy Hook families -- those who were defa med could sue the platforms. Right now, they can't.

My point is: they are doing that already. They're identifying things that are false and incendiary and boosting those things. With no liability. I think the liability should be imposed for algorithmic boosting. They shouldn't censor posts. But not everybody is entitled to massive boosting.

As of this week we have a new social meida app, Sora, from OpenAI, which makes powerful AI generated video in seconds and spreads it around. They need the normal liability other content creators and media companies have to force any kind of accountability.

We know their algorithms are already identifying content for aspects of it that are harmful to boost it. Let's disincentivize that.

Yeah, if social media as we know it went away, would that be such a bad thing? But assuming their business is so strong they're motivated to find a way to keep their model, they don't need to arbitrate the truth of every post. How about just NOT algorithmically boosting lies to travel 6X faster?

Don’t forget the Ellisons getting in on TikTok too — which because of Section 230 is immune from lawsuits! That’s where I think we need to focus and can make an impact.

No. We need to strip the special immunity social media companies have from lawsuits (for defamation, etc). Put them on an even playing field with the rest of the market, and expose their business models to the same liability as everyone else. Not govt intervention or regulation.

This is a nightmare. Not that traditional media needs to be *the* trusted source of news, but knowing the alternative information ecosystem people are turning to, there needs to be a systemic effort to disincentivize lies there and incentivize facts.

(h/t @oliverdarcy.bsky.social at Status)

Think about the role of these quotations marks in this reporting on this news about reporting, and what it says about the state of reality right now.

The Film the BBC Wouldn’t Air

🎧 Spotify: open.spotify.com/episode/3CGZ...

The Film the BBC Wouldn’t Air Podcast Episode · Question Everything · 10/02/2025 · 45m

🎧🍎: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/q...

On this week’s Question Everything … the urgent film about Gaza the BBC wouldn’t air.

🔗🔗Links to listen in the thread📻⬇️

Anyone working at CBS News who wants to share anything about what's going on around you in the coming days and weeks (or months) -- totally anonymously -- my signal is open: brihreed.45

Robert Redford on the true meaning behind All the President's Men #movietalk #filmtok #movietok #cinema #filmcommunity #moviediscussion #filmhistory #movieculture #moviehistory #movies #films #filmmak... TikTok video by Lucas Cavanagh

Redford on the importance of journalism, made me a bit weepy , tbqh www.tiktok.com/t/ZTMN6f8gp/

Question Everything News Commentary Podcast · Updated Biweekly · Reporter Brian Reed re-examines everything about journalism, the profession he thought he knew. In the middle of making his second hit podcast, Brian got s...

Subscribe on Apple: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/q...

Question Everything Returns, Raring for a Fight

Follow on Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/2sNXpac...

"Question Everything" is back with a new mission -- and a bigger fact-checking budget. (Thanks @kcrw.com 🙏🏼)

Tomorrow.

Well we very much agree on this.

I think it made sense at the time and did for a while.
Specifically, I think a platform that's using powerful algorithms to assess content, boost and target posts to audiences on a massive scale, and raking in profit as a result, should bear liability as a publisher. Those are editorial decisions.

Fair enough. Gotta respect logging off.

It'd also be great if we could accompany this reform with strong anti-SLAPP protections nationwide, but that might be phase two. Happy to hear your reactions though and think it through with you.

Thanks for your pushback. Definitely don't want to dismantle free speech on social media! I want full first amendment protections for all social media companies and users. Times v Sullivan, high actual malice protections. I just think tech companies shouldn't get a special shield from being sued.

The limits of using AI (ChatGPT) for journalistic research.

A funny @nytimes.com report about Skydance’s interest in Warner Brothers Discovery.

How JPMorgan Enabled the Crimes of Jeffrey Epstein

We're gathering a group of reporters who've covered Epstein for years tonight for one of our wine shop episodes. One of the reporters who uncovered these nauseating revelations about JP Morgan will be with us. Drop any questions you have here...
www.nytimes.com/2025/09/08/m...