erin mccann |Verified account

Someone complained that it wasn't tweeted enough. Twitter is a lot of things for news orgs, but it is not actually a big driver of traffic. "If you'd tweeted it more, more people would have seen it" is one of those things that sounds true but, frustratingly, is not.

A bunch of people -- so many people -- seemed especially angry that the strike wasn't getting more air on CNN. Which, ok, let's break that down a little:

studies have pretty consistently found that people who rely on TV (local news or cable) as their main source of news are the least informed. It's a passive experience, and it's limited by time constraints. That's not a judgment on TV viewers, it's just one piece of a puzzle.

And 2 on that point, which is a little bit of a judgement yes, what about the CNN viewing experience in the last few years leads you to believe that they're interested in informing you of the important news of the day?

(Which leads to my favorite of yesterday's comments, which is that I am elitist scum for suggesting that people are responsible in even small ways for seeking out the news and making themselves informed.)

(As long as I am responding specifically to some of the nastier tweets from yesterday, no, other lady who also called me elitist scum, it is not my job to sit around personally sending you links all day just to prove my point, because at the end you still wouldn't believe me.)

But to get back on track for a minute, yes THIS, which is an extrapolation of what I was saying about twitter and the news yesterday: https://twitter.com/twallack/status/970321838575321088?s=21 …

By their behavior, the audience is *incredibly* fractured now. We really don't have a way right now, outside historic and huge events, to all have the same experience of the news. To all be consuming the same information.