Category: Technology Author : Steven Hodson Posted: November 27, 2008
Tags : , ,
Subscribe: Tech Feed, Email, Twitter

Twitter News Network? You’ve got to be kidding


    StumbleUpon Digg Reddit Mixx del.icio.us MySpace Fark Facebook TwitThis Propeller Wikio Yahoo! Buzz

journalism

It seems lately that when somewhere in the world goes to hell in a hand basket everyone starts lining up on either side of the fence as to whether or not Twitter is a valid news source. Hell some are even calling it Twitter journalism, but if that is the case then journalism is really in a sorry state.

As convincing an argument as Mathew Ingram wrote late yesterday about how it is a source of journalism, I think there is an important ingredient missing from his point. Which is that unsubstantiated or wrong news fill travel faster and wider than any news which corrects those first reports. By the very nature of Twitter and how one’s friend network is setup it almost guarantees that while you may first hear the wrong news you won’t necessarily hear the corrected version because it might be coming from someone who isn’t a part of your network.

Both Svetlana Gladkova from Prof.com and Mathew do rightly point out that being a mainstream news service doesn’t guarantee that they won’t make errors as well. I would suggest thought that their ability to get the corrected information out to the same people who who heard the incorrect version is much more likely. Just because they are your friends or a part of your social network doesn’t imply that they won’t pass along misleading or incorrect information and the idea that that what they are sending your way is journalism is drop dead wrong.

At best Twitter is an excellent way to get leads for news or information that you then follow up via other means; at worst the network is nothing more than a global hen party. The idea that a 140 characters; which has passed through so many hands by the time it actually reaches you, is even remotely similar to a live feed from any journalist on the ground; even with the mistakes they might make, is head shaking.

The other argument that the Twitter proponents like to use; and we see it all the time, is that the news will hit Twitter before the mainstream journalists write; or speak, a single word. So what? In this day and age and the speed by which information traverses the world does five minutes, ten minutes or even twenty minutes for that matter really make that much of a difference? Do we really need to be plugged in that badly?

Twitter might be a fun way to waste some time but it is not the next frontier of journalism; or at least I sure as hell hope it isn’t.



You might also like



  • Twitter can be used as a news service. However because this is done as a second thought it is not well organized as there is no systematic way to enter news so that it can be easily found and separated from the noise.
    Because of this there is no easy and fast way to search for this information.

    We have built have integrated a news posting service into our micro blog “Conversations” This ability to post news to the microblog is also integrated into our feed reader and both services post to twitter.
    When you search on adelph.us for a news story you will receive results that are from both main stream media as well as from related micro blogs.
  • Rohil
    Honestly speaking, you are ignorant or jealous.
  • excuse me?
  • Some tweet looking comments:
    Can I trust your blog? We trust those we know. A link to the backstory or blog post helps a lot.
    Journos contacted me to find Twitterers/Flickrers and bloggers in Mumbai. *shrugs* I shoulda sent them to a fake account? :)
    71% of Australians don't trust what they read in a newspaper, 65% don't trust what they read online (Roy Morgan)

    I got ZERO news from Australian MSM - I channel hopped (I only have free to air) all day. From 9:30 to 3pm I got Kerri Anne and childrens telly. And nothing on news breaks that I hadn't got hours earlier from Twitter online. Six Oclock evening news looked like a retweet of breaking news all day. ABC occasionally came up with something interesting but for the rest of them, disgraceful coverage. If TV's role is to inform, and if that were their only role, they failed.

    I don't trust everything that comes through Twitter, but I can quickly discern who/what/where it's coming from based on the relationships. Contextually that makes it MORE trustworthy for me, than CNN reports claiming that the Mumbai bombings was an Anti American activity (in spite of the fact it was mostly Indians that were targetted). MSM is shameful in both denying proper uptodate coverage and in making assumptions based on what they think the audience wants to hear.

    TweetGrid let me connect to Mumbai live bloggers UltraBrown and Arunshanbhag and Flickr (like @vinu) and the mumbai twitterers who are compiling a list of known dying/dead/missing on Google Docs.

    Truth in journalism comes from numbers. Not from sticking a station microphone in front of a local who then goes home to blog/twitter in more detail what happened.
  • zaurav
    I think twitter is like 'chinese whisper' on the internet. One user passes down something to the next and it continues throughout the circles of friends. The only difference is the person at the end of the line has exactly the same thing the person at the beginning sent off.
blog comments powered by Disqus
King.com (Midasplayer.com Ltd.)