Posted 3 years ago

Short URL

7 Notes

On tweets as sources

To the people (commenters on Engadget and otherwise) angered today by the fact that we sourced a tweet as a viable piece of information, you should realize something: the world is changing, news is changing, the flow of information is changing, and with it, our old perceptions about what is “real” and “credible” will have to change too.

Is 140 characters too short for a “real” piece of information? No. A status update on Facebook can be a real piece of information. A quick SMS is a real piece of information (remember that story about Mickey Rourke just before the Oscars?). A video shot by a kid in the middle of a war zone can be a real piece of information. And yes, a tweet is a real piece of information if it comes from a place that matters. If it comes from the right place.

Earlier today, we covered a story based on a tweet that came from what appeared to be the “right place” — the fact that the source didn’t pan out doesn’t negate the possibility that that piece of news was viable. We have covered news from equally unfamiliar places before, and we will again. Many times, those unfamiliar places turned up great stories. If you share the shortsighted view that because something is delivered in a medium you’re not used to it doesn’t count, then you’re going to be in a lot of trouble for the foreseeable future.

This isn’t about defending our story, mind you, it’s about defending our approach to covering news and the amazing possibilities of new journalism. It’s not like it used to be; it’s complicated and confusing and regularly disappointing — and that can be a difficult new beast to wrestle with — but it can also yield amazing results. I don’t mind playing that game.