I enjoy reading a newsletter from Phillips P. O’Brien; the most recent one I’ve read is entitled: “Weekend Update #7: Some ideas on how the war is being presented and analyzed – oldies and not goodies.”
In years past I was active on Twitter. These days I occasionally post my Preserved Stories posts but aside from that, I am not active. However, I do receive notifications via Gmail of some people on Twitter whom I have followed in the past. I also subscribe to a few email newsletter that I learned about in recent years on Twitter. Among the newsletters is one from Phillips P. O’Brien; the most recent one I’ve read is entitled: “Weekend Update #7: Some ideas on how the war is being presented and analyzed – oldies and not goodies.”
An excerpt reads:
Now that tweet thread from May was done up in response to a New York Times editorial arguing (completely inaccurately as its been shown) that US public opinion would soon lose interest in the war. Now, Im a online subscriber to the Times, and I read the paper daily. However their war reporting, while interesting, regularly takes certain ‘lines’ that I think are not reflective of the reality of the war and how it should be understood.
I also read the New York Times, which I access through the Toronto Public Library website. I like to read commentary about the New York Times from people such as Phillips P. O’Brien. The Times is a useful source of information, in my view, but it’s but one source among many.
No longer being active on Twitter means that my attention is now more directed at other things of interest including goings on in the analog world.