Cristina Carmody Tilley

Why, oh why, can't we de-voice these apex wannabe-powerbrokers and just wait for actual voters to do the work of listening, thinking, and voting? The chattering class writes FOR MONEY, not for democracy.

Not sure I get the shade. You're saying they're hypocritical because they have money and leisure so tax bills shouldn't matter to them? Maybe so, but that's the human condition, not a Brooklyn condition. Are "private school moms" as a class supposed to be immune? Or are they just easy targets?

Pleased to review recent thoughts on insurance and tort law from the great @notthattombaker.bsky.social. Check it out here:
torts.jotwell.com/price-and-pr...

Can you say more about why it's perhaps unwitting?

Agreed the current climate is toxic . . . hopefully we'll all continue to strive for open-ended exchanges on issues where there are good faith reasons for diverse points of view.

Does 230 not now have an exemption for federal criminal prosecution? As I understand, the Fosta-Sesta exemption allowed civil suits against Backpage by trafficked individuals. If the concern about unraveling 230 is criminal prosecution by Bondi, does the statute not already allow that?

Are you saying they would pursue criminal prosecutions against the sites?

Judges are the last line of defense for truth, especially in a political environment where disinformation is a tool to amass power. Former federal judge @judgeluttig.bsky.social joins us at 11 a.m. EST. #Velshi

The fifty-year ascent of inside baseball journalism has created a club of "cool kid" reporters who perform for each other instead of finding and communicating information to citizens.

Curious why a Section 230 critique troubles you?

This is the fourth or fifth time the GooMeta industrial complex has tried to force smartglasses on the market. Consumers keep rejecting them, and the companies keep pushing them . . . makes you wonder who stands to benefit from this "innovation."

Thanks for this informative thread!

Is the problem here that academics are not interdisciplinary? Or that actual human beings are not imaginative? Whether she calls it a second shift or a squeeze, it wasn't real to her until SHE was pumping on the train. Easy to miss the literature when you don't think it pertains to you.

Strategic, not stupid. He's from Iowa and is fully aware of this. His specialty is provocation, not actual policy.

Must report he's an Iowa native and double-alum of the University of Iowa

I think this ethos predates Trump. And I see the party's claims of identity empathy to gain votes and then capitulate to economic behemoths as the breeding ground for Trump. Sure, short term, win, dethrone, save democracy. But many of us think that's long-term recipe for more unbridled capitalism.

Unconscionable

Curious if the NYTimes has succeeded in winning conservative subscribers, as their evolving op-ed and news mix seems designed to do

The whole premise of the interview is that the party needs to do a better job pandering to whichever voters will put it over the top and allow it to recapture power. The goal is power and the policies are the instrument, which seems backwards.

Biggest problem, all respect to the objections raised here, is that the preference of the editorial board appears to be dictating coverage decisions by actual news reporters and editors.

What am I missing? Why are smart people whose business interests are premised on authority and accuracy not loudly shunning tech that is at best, not ready for prime time, and at worst, designed to vitiate human enterprise?

Just what law needs . . . more unbridled capitalism . . .

NYT, is this the uninhibited, robust, and wide-open coverage you promised us sixty years ago? Feckless.

J.B. is getting better and better

What, honestly, are these firms after? If they want warm bodies, anyone should do. And if they want proven talent, they need to wait til 2L. What they're going to get by seeking "good" first-semester 1Ls are students with generational polish or elite undergrad credentials. Maybe that's the point?

One justification for First Amendment bars on press regulation is that the market can incentivize quality journalism without allowing gov't imposition of orthodoxy. But in recent decades, the market has rewarded a lot of lazy, low-quality coverage. Refreshing to see consumers punishing dreck.

I actually think she believes this, and I can see how she considers it a theoretically principled stance. But so long as her colleagues in the majority are practiced in being unprincipled, and so long as the country yearns for clear signals, her excessively academic approach grows less tenable daily

Haha and all, but Frog and Toad already has the capacity to radicalize children by depicting quiet care and everyday humanity. Let it do that work without turning it into yet another forum for partisan contestation.

Were judges ever meant to save democracy? It was precisely when we delegated the job of civic worldbuilding to the federal courts that we stopped talking to each other and doing democracy ourselves. papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....

Good to be reminded that "the press" comprises more than celebrity talking heads . . . so many real people experiencing real indignity as they try to document what is happening on our streets and in our neighborhoods