I was reading an interview with Max Clifford in Hot Press recently and his comments about Twitter caught my attention. Speaking in the context of the Ryan Giggs/Imogen Thomas scandal, Clifford said, “There are so many things written on Twitter which are total nonsense, it doesn’t have anything like the same impact [as the front page of a national newspaper].“
With approximately 140 million tweets posted per day, how does one tell what’s garbage and what’s not? For every superinjunction that is revealed, a hoax spreads like wildfire.
One interesting aspect of this is that media have reported incorrectly on a number of stories that originated online as they were not verified. For example in the last two weeks alone, Amina Araff, the blogger who presented herself online as “A Gay Girl in Damascus”, was revealed to be a man; a number of outlets reported on a mass grave which turned out to be nothing more than a hoax call; and the story of a girl who got her 152 Facebook friends tattooed onto her arm was incorrect also as it was just a temporary transfer.
There has been a lot of commentary recently about how people are increasingly turning to Twitter for breaking news ahead of mainstream media websites. While journalists may be under some pressure to break stories, I think it is increasingly more important that their role is to guide how news emerges by verifying whether the information is accurate. It is obvious something which is being addressed as the process the BBC uses to verify user generated content illustrates.
Steve Rubel has done some really interesting research in this space and I’d recommend reading his presentation ‘Authority in the Age of Overload’, which I’ve included below. Rubel correctly concludes that people will increasingly turn to a trusted group of sources before a message resonates with them.
In my opinion, it is more important that journalists reinforce their position in this authoritative role as a trusted source of information, rather than rushing to break news.
2 Responses to “Twitter, Media & Verification”
Leave a Reply
Search
There are no recent tweets.
Categories
- Books (4)
- Buzz (3)
- E-PR (142)
- General (491)
- Ideas (7)
- Personal (77)
- PR in Ireland (87)
- Resources (5)
- Technology & PR (6)
Archives
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
- February 2006
- January 2006
- December 2005
- November 2005
- October 2005
- September 2005
- August 2005
- July 2005
- June 2005
- May 2005

The dilemma for journos is that as they work under the constraints (and editorial influence) of their employer, their ability to be transparent is slightly undermined or at least skewered by their position.
And unfortunately judging by recent media trends, the rush to be first or dumb down content to draw the masses online looks like it could drag down the quality of certain titles.