is there anything sadder than a political agenda that can be expressed in 140 characters?
Formerly respected news outlets reproducing others' 140 character comments as a substitute for actually asking subject experts specific questions.
I understand the rationale for reproducing Twitter comments when they come from someone directly connected with the story. I can even see how comments from people claiming to be involved or particularly pithy statements might make it into a "breaking news" feed. What I don't understand is why news outlets with loftier ambitions than Buzzfeed think tweets like these:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-33656579
is substantial enough to constitute a commentary piece.
(Or worse still, the obituary complete with "@randomdave said 'RIP U were a legend'")
Comments
Formerly respected news outlets reproducing others' 140 character comments as a substitute for actually asking subject experts specific questions.
I understand the rationale for reproducing Twitter comments when they come from someone directly connected with the story. I can even see how comments from people claiming to be involved or particularly pithy statements might make it into a "breaking news" feed. What I don't understand is why news outlets with loftier ambitions than Buzzfeed think tweets like these: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-33656579 is substantial enough to constitute a commentary piece.
(Or worse still, the obituary complete with "@randomdave said 'RIP U were a legend'")