Misguided idea, imo. Trying to "fact-check" whatever one encounters (because it's digital) is counterproductive and, frankly, an authoritarian impulse. Plus, journalists should NOT be reporting on everything they can access. News value and public interest, not gossip and prying.https://twitter.com/NiemanLab/status/1359934480417501185 …
-
Show this thread
-
We have enough real problems with our public sphere and the digital transition. Lack of "fact-checking" on a platform explicitly designed for ephemerality (which limits its public impact) is pretty low on that list.
4 replies 30 retweets 293 likesShow this thread -
If Clubhouse starts incorporating virality and algorithmic amplification, all this might change. If I had to guess, I'd say people would then flee it the way they flee from here. I guess undue media attention plus the Clubhouse growth team may well cooperate to make that happen.
3 replies 14 retweets 182 likesShow this thread -
Also: Tech people are upset at existing tech criticism/reporting. While there are notable exceptions, the real problem is most tech reporting HAS NOT BEEN properly critical and too often focuses on trivia and remains superficial. Tech has NOT been criticized/scrutinized enough.
6 replies 41 retweets 295 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @zeynep
This



Reporting on tech is hard, because it requires a deeper understanding of how platforms work on a technical level.
And simplifying the explanations often distorts or completely hides what's happening.1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
I'm absolutely fine with criticism of tech, but it helps a lot if the criticism is based in actual reality, not in how people think it works.
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
+1 - which means more substantive engagement needed on the part of both the companies and the critics
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @robleathern @nralbers
Rob, yes, and it could start with you guys providing real access to things that matter. One of the reason some of the reporting sucks is that people are doing their best from the shadows they can see and selective dribs and drabs—and then it gets called anecdotal.
2 replies 1 retweet 21 likes -
-
I agree. We all have work to do here.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
For clarity I don't think that this is "let's meet in the middle". I don't mean we need more of what led to CA brouhaha, but there's little to no path for *independent* research. For example: on how FB groups & tribalizing dynamics work. You clearly have internal research.
-
-
I don’t have any ongoing insights on FB since I left, but in general as tech industry leaders, our teams have a responsibility to explain/educate/debate/discuss complex issues like these.
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Yeah I didn’t mean “you” personally. Same with YouTube. There’s a lot of eyeballing and anecdotal stuff when, if there was cooperation, there’s so much more we could do with sensible access/research.
0 replies 0 retweets 4 likes
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.