Talk:Matt Taibbi

Add more information on key Twitter exposes?

I suggest the following installments of the Twitter files section warrant a bit more detail:

The fifteenth installment, released on January 27, 2023, by Taibbi, reports on the Hamilton 68 Dashboard maintained by the Alliance for Securing Democracy.

The seventeenth installment, released on March 2, 2023, by Taibbi, reports on the Global Engagement Center which was established by the Countering Foreign Propaganda and Disinformation Act. SM-Mara (talk) 15:42, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

What detail? – Muboshgu (talk) 16:23, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

Installments 15,16,17, & 19. Are currently mentioned.

But, a related issue is that the article states: "The emails were provided to Taibbi by Twitter CEO Elon Musk and documented parts of the discussions among Twitter's communication team about how Twitter should handle a New York Post article about a laptop computer that had been owned by Hunter Biden." and has 4 citations:[75][76][77][78] but I recall Musk provided access, and Taibbi found the messages. No? --RudolfoMD (talk) 22:42, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Sourcing

Our section on these releases uses poor sources. Some are Fox, which is not reliable for politics according to RSP; others are primary sources (Taibbi's Twitter) or opinion pieces in reason.com. Can we replace with proper RSs? I think the Twitter Files article might have better sources. BobFromBrockley (talk) 20:45, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

checking the "controversy" section for accurate citations and potential bias favoring Taibbi

I believe that this entire "controversy" section may be written with a biased interest in defending Taibbi and minimizing the claims against him. Overall, it seems like more than 75% of this paragraph is written and presented so that readers see Taibbi's apology and arguments about it all being "satire." This appears to be a deliberate choice, and the focus is lopsided.

For example, look at the way this paragraph looked before my recent edits. Previously, the section used a Washington Post article by Kathy Lally to quote Taibbi's Facebook apology, despite Lally actually arguing that Taibbi (and the eXile as a whole) has a documented history of sexual harassment and misogynistic behavior. No mention of Lally's many claims, some with documentation and evidence, appeared previously; instead, Lally's writing was used to further express Taibbi's defense of himself. 2601:601:51C:43FF:A1B2:6994:FA21:386C (talk) 00:05, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

Opinion column in BLP

In regards to this edit Special:MobileDiff/1177874127, I find it arguable that an opinion column is an appropriate source for this topic. Does anybody have an opinion on this? XeCyranium (talk) 22:04, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

It is properly attributed as required by WP:RSEDITORIAL. Other sourcing on the page indicates that editors are not particularly concerned with only using the highest quality sources. For example:

• A contributor article by Eliot Borenstein in the generally unreliable HuffPuff and an opinion article by Kathy Lally in the Washingpost are used to support the sentences: "In a Facebook post responding to the controversy, Taibbi apologized for the "cruel and misogynistic language" used in the book, and said the work was conceived as a satire of the "reprehensible" behavior of American expatriates in Russia and that the description of events in the chapter was "fictional and not true". In 2017, the Washington Post published an article by journalist Kathy Lally about Taibbi and Ames' time at the eXile. Lally wrote that the "eXile’s distinguishing feature, more than anything else, was its blinding sexism — which often targeted [her]" and that "so many of their sins were real" ".
• The National Review (no consensus on reliability) is used for the opinion: "Jeffrey Blehar, writing for National Review, said that Taibbi's reporting "contained few, if any, explosive revelations for people who have been tuned in to the debacle surrounding Twitter's suppression of the New York Post story on Hunter Biden's laptop" ". Other National Review articles are used in the article.
• For some reason a “better source needed” tag has been placed against a generally reliable Reason article. Other Reason sources used in the article do not have a tag.
• A Daily Beast (no consensus on reliability) article is used for factual statements related to Taibbi’s relationship to Elon Musk.
• A Newsweek (generally unreliable with some exceptions) article is used for factual statements related to an IRS raid on Taibbi without attribution.
• An opinion article in The Atlantic (from the "Ideas" column) is used for factual statements without attribution.

Given the above, I don't see a problem using a WSJ editorial with appropriate attribution. Burrobert (talk) 06:40, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

While I have reservations about the use of the column even with attribution given it's seeking to provide some kind of "confirmation" I think the other uses of low quality sources more just mean there's a plethora of problems with this article beyond that one. XeCyranium (talk) 00:27, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

*2023. The Dao Prize for the "Twitter Files"

The Dao Prize of $100,000 for the "Twitter Files" was awarded to Matt Taibbi, Bari Weiss, and Michael Shellenberger to recognize excellence in investigative journalism which stands out for accuracy and courage.

The Dao Prize is funded by the Daofeng and Angela Foundation in conjunction with the National Journalism Center.

Here is the website for the National Journalism Center. The description at Medium states: "Since 1977, the National Journalism Center has trained aspiring conservative journalists in the values of responsible, balanced, and accurate reporting. Weekly seminars and on-the-job experience provide participants with the tools to become leaders in combating bias in the mainstream media."

In his acceptance speech published at Racket News on November 3, 2020 Taibbi stated: "More than two dozen reporters worked on the Twitter Files at different times, including Lee Fang, Paul Thacker, David Zweig, Aaron Maté, Matt Farwell, and many others, across the political spectrum. Journalists from left-leaning publications and reporters with conservative backgrounds both worked on this story, which was unique enough to employ pseudonymous citizen journalists like “Techno Fog” and Pulitzer Prize winner Susan Schmidt. Susan is here tonight and has a new Twitter Files piece coming out on Twitter and Racket in the coming days."Kmccook (talk) 04:16, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

References

I reverted the addition of this item. PPlease see the reason im my edit summary. It should not be re-added prior to consensus for inclusion. SPECIFICO talk 11:59, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

I am curious. How does one determine that an award is not "credible"? Surgicus (talk) 12:22, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Has a third-party RS mentioned the award? Llll5032 (talk) 15:09, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

It has been announced at Daily Signal here: Dao Award Aims to Send Pulitzer Prize Packing (dailysignal.com); at Rise Up Times here: Matt Taibbi: Dao Prize Acceptance Speech and Interview with Glenn Greenwald - RISE UP TIMESat Real Clear Politics here: Bringing Factual Journalism Out of the Basement | RealClearPolitics; at Bakerfield.com Twitter Files Awarded Inaugural Dao Prize for Excellence In Investigative Journalism | News | bakersfield.com; Taibbi's acceptance speech is here: (100) Dao Prize Acceptance Speech - by Matt Taibbi - Racket News; Taibbi's acceptance speech is on YouTube here: (27) Matt Taibbi wins DAO Prize for excellence in investigative journalism & $100k for the Twitter Files - YouTube, It was included in this coverage: Washington Free Beacon Reporters Honored as Dao Prize Finalists For Excellence in Investigative JournalismKmccook (talk) 18:10, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Are any of those considered good sources at WP:RSP or WP:RSN? Llll5032 (talk) 18:25, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

The Dao Award of $100,000 was for reporting on the Twitter Files - Wikipedia. It went to multiple writers. Matt Taibbi accepted the Award.

"Bari Weiss, Michael Shellenberger and I win the inaugural Dao Prize for excellence in investigative journalism, for the Twitter reports"

To the National Journalism Center and the Dao Feng and Angela Foundation: I could not be more grateful that you’ve chosen to create such a significant new prize for old-school, fact-based reporting. The journalism profession has become hopelessly politicized in recent years. Editors now care more about narrative than fact, and as many of the people in this room know, there are now fairly extreme penalties for failing to toe party lines. This begins with pressures within the business to conform and continues with algorithmic targeting of advertisers of the sort that the Washington Examiner and its excellent reporter Gabe Kaminsky, who’s here tonight, reported on.

Here is the link to Matt Taibbi's Acceptance Speech: (100) Dao Prize Acceptance Speech - by Matt Taibbi - Racket News

Perhaps the Award was not reported by WP:RSP because it was critical of them.Kmccook (talk) 18:46, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

There seems to be some confusion here. WP:RSP is not a Wikipedia policy and many Reliable Sources are not listed there. For example, the CBC, Canada's public broadcaster, considered generally very reliable and widely cited on Wikipedia as RS is not listed. Most RS used in Wikipedia are not listed in WP:RSP. The guideline for a Biography of Living Person is actually WP:BLP which states that material which are challenged or likely to be challenged should not be included. So unless the fact that this award was given to this person is challenged by any RS or likely to be challenged by any RS, it can be included as per guidelines. Poyani (talk) 03:46, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

WP:BLP says, "Be very firm about the use of high-quality sources." The CBC has been discussed at WP:RSN. Llll5032 (talk) 04:46, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

The observation made by Matt Taibbi in his acceptance speech addresses this concern.

"Most of these algorithmic penalties are based on a complex credentialing system, a process Google calls “surfacing authoritative content.” This basically means that if you’re not recognized by certain “authoritative” organizations, your work will not appear in features like Google News, Facebook’s news feed, the “For You” bar on Twitter, or in many institutional search engines. This has the effect of de-amplifying politically unorthodox content, from conservative sites like the Examiner or the New York Post to Consortium News or even the World Socialist Web Site. These sites are essentially consigned by algorithm to a separate set of Dewey Decimal shelves in the basement of the world’s library."

Dao Prize Acceptance Speech - by Matt Taibbi - Racket NewsKmccook (talk) 04:54, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

This seems irrelevant to the discussion at hand. XeCyranium (talk) 00:29, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

The current shorter wording is an improvement. Llll5032 (talk) 05:17, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

Yes, no need for the edit that was intended to undercut the achievement. As Taibbi notes, the Dao Prize is a "significant new prize for old-school, fact-based reporting. The journalism profession has become hopelessly politicized in recent years." Wikipedia does not need to follow that trend. Dao Prize Acceptance Speech - by Matt Taibbi - Racket News Kmccook (talk) 12:30, 7 November 2023 (UTC) 

2024 Samizdat Prize

On March 7, 2024 Taibbi won the inaugural Samizdat Prize along with Jay Bhattacharya (Stanford) and Miranda Devine (New York Post reporter). The RealClear Media Fund awarded the Prize. I added this sentence to Taibbi's page along with a link to the Award and the link was deleted. So far there has been no third-party source covering the event that is acceptable, but the event did happen, the Prize was awarded.--Kmccook (talk) 00:53, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

Image

Hello @Kmccook, I want to defuse this before it escalates into an edit war. What's wrong with ? It is a recent photo of him, and it is freely licensed (the copyright information can be found in the description of the video). The previous photo is from more ten years ago, and does not reflect what he currently looks like. Respectfully, Bremps... 13:38, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

The video this image is sourced from, which is listed at WikiCommons. Bremps... 13:41, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

I personally prefer the one that was there before over . I dont think he looks radically different now compared to 10 years ago so i dont see any need to change the picture. Bonewah (talk) 14:23, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

Images must be sourced with copyright and permission. The image you selected seems to be an advertisement promoting a commercial enterprise. I don't want an escalation either. But this could be viewed as the North Face controversy was--North Face tried to scam Wikipedia to get its products to the top of Google search - The Verge I don't think you were doing that, but others might. Thank you so much for being courteous. I like your variety of interesting edits. Mine are about libraries and censorship (sort of boring)--but you have many so interests. I always like to peruse the work of insightful wide-ranging editors.Kmccook (talk) 15:47, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

I do not understand how this image could be construed to be an advertisement. This is an interview by a news organization. May you clarify?

Thanks for the compliment. Everyone has different interests.

Bremps... 17:25, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

O, when it was posted the image said something about a clothing manufacturer.Kmccook (talk) 18:50, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

I fixed that just now. Bremps... 23:28, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

I also personally prefer the earlier image and agree that the subject does not even look different, so a more recent image is not exactly of greater utility. And forgive my bias, but the Adidas and Sussex County Miners merch logos just detract from the focus I believe. Οἶδα (talk) 22:41, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

I have now also uploaded a new screenshot that I believe is better, but I still prefer the old image. Οἶδα (talk) 23:33, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

Though I still think the new images are better, I respect and accept the consensus. Bremps... 00:24, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Family background

Re 2600:100C:B02A:4E55:BD64:825:E17A:DA3C (talk · contribs · WHOIS): "literally described as a fact"..."that his father was likely". Do you not see the point I was making? Likely is not a definite statement of fact. I would argue that level of supposition could warrant its exclusion from the article. Οἶδα (talk) 03:14, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello, I'm the IP in question, on roaming. With regards to your argument, I feel this is out of keeping with N:POV, because:

The source describes as fact that an American serviceman is likely the father of Mike Taibbi, and even identifies this man by a surname. The source for this is a head of the Foundling Hospital. That would make this a WP:SECONDARY source -- a high quality one at that.

Although you could argue that the word "likely" opens this claim up to speculation, we would require a reliable source that disputes the factual nature of the Foundling Hospital's claims, to omit this information from the Wiki. Without such, we are omitting details based on our point of view, rather than what the reliable sources say.

At the end of the day, a fact is still a fact, whether it is likely or not. If NBC published as factual that Mike's mother was a Filipino-Hawaiian woman, and that his father was likely an American serviceman with the last name "Denny", we should relay that information to the reader, regardless of what we think is likely. Omitting 50% of Mike Taibbi's parentage leaves questions for the reader where factual answers have been provided by reliable sources; and these answers aren't disputed anywhere by a reliable source. I feel like the father's existence matters. 2600:100C:B037:58FE:104A:FFDE:83B:3EE9 (talk) 15:13, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

Yes, and I appreciate that you changed the wording to include "likely" because your initial and second edits did not reflect that. You wrote that "his father was an American military serviceman", a definitive claim not exactly made in the NBC article. Otherwise, I agree with retaining the current information and as such have not attempted to remove it.

I have tried my best to maintain a level of conciseness in the ancestry section of this article because, for many years now, it has been subject to constant revision by editors who I believe have needlessly compounded and obscured the information. I had reverted your first edit because I believed "mixed" was concise enough, followed by his mother's ethnic Filipino/Hawaiian background. And I was considering the fact that "American military serviceman" is not revealing of any ethnicity, which is what these few sentences center on. That is what I was getting at. I appreciate your thoughts on this matter and never meant to suggest that we omit 50% of Mike Taibbi's parentage. Οἶδα (talk) 10:55, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

Adoptive father is adopted?

Since MT is himself adopted, I'm not sure I follow this logic: "According to Taibbi, his surname is a Sicilian name of Lebanese origin; however, he is of neither Sicilian nor Lebanese descent because his father was adopted." My personal logic balks at that because I feel the key reason that MT is not of Sicilian nor Lebanese descent is actually because his adoptive father is not biologically related to MT; to me, the innate ethnicity of an adoptive parent is generally a non-issue although cultural aspects could theoretically be a factor. I'm guessing the point of mentioning that is merely to address the ethnicity of the surname, which is interesting to those of us who are curious about such things. It's also interesting that his adoptive father is adopted. Or am I not understanding and this instead a reference to his biological father? I'm just a bit confused by this part. And, as I read it, it was his adoptive parents who separated when he was young, correct? (I just have trouble deciphering whether or not he knows the identity of his biological parents because of the specificity of information provided about them.) Thirddaughter (talk) 19:00, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

@Thirddaughter: You seem to be confused. Matt Taibbi was not adopted. His father, Mike Taibbi, was. Οἶδα (talk) 18:29, 10 May 2024 (UTC)