A few thoughts on @maggieNYT’s article on Twitter. A lot of fair critiques within.https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/20/sunday-review/maggie-haberman-twitter-donald-trump.html …
-
-
“There is an important discussion about journalism that must take place, including about how all of us performed during the 2016 campaign, but Twitter is not where a nuanced or thoughtful discussion can happen.” This is what we’d like to fix the most.
Show this thread -
Fundamentally, we need to focus more on the conversational dynamics within Twitter. We haven’t paid enough consistent attention here. Better organization, more context, helping to identify credibility, ease of use. Challenging work and would love to hear your thoughts and ideas.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
But we all just want our timelines to be in chronological order, why are you not bloody listening?
-
Ahhh totally agree. I don’t use Instagram anymore for that reason and Facebook is just as bad. Is it too much to ask
@jack - 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
One of my favorite parts of twitter is random brilliance by people not designated as opinion leaders.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Here's an idea for ya,
@jack. How bout you make algorithmic curation an optional setting? Then those of us with >2 brain cells to rub together can switch it off, and those who prefer not to think for themselves, can switch it on?#Censorship - 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
TERRRIBLE IDEA. I’ve seen plenty of so called “experts” either boldly lie or just flat out have it wrong. Allowing certain people on this platform to spread information with even more power and influence, because they’ve been deemed experts, sounds disastrous
-
@jack misses the entire reason his platform was a killer app in the first place- egalitarianism. -
or maybe jack just wants to play god. the media influences the narrative - but at least there are various media sources - now 2 companies (twitter/Facebook) can influence all media outlets. i think jack understands this dynamic probably better than anyone.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
An option for a straight chronological order timeline is my hope. If something is breaking news, I will see it that way, without having to wade through algorithmically generated content.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
We're smarter than you give us credit for Jack! Let us decide. I don't want you choosing MY credible voices for me.
-
Totally. That was my thought. It reveals what he really thinks of his bread and butter. Quite revealing. It is just manipulation disguised as help.
-
Tweet unavailable
-
If I remember the original tweet I just don’t think it is helpful or necessary for anyone outside of yourself to determine what is true or not for you. We are better off evaluating and deciding for ourselves. Life taught me that. That’s how I know.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
This is actually the best part of Twitter -- people can rise and fall on their own merits, without gatekeeping. Adding gatekeeping is the opposite of what makes Twitter worthwhile, and it will cost you subscribers.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
On the other hand, I'd claim that a lot of anointed experts aren't all that. Sometimes, the voices of outsiders matter. I'd argue the opposite - the curation towards the Maggies detracts from pluralism. If I wanted to read the NYT, I'd do it. Twitter has another value proposition
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.