GooberTheHat wrote:Yossarian wrote:But yes, I understand if one extra click (turns out it is only one) to read the whole thing is too onerous for you. Clicking a link at the end of something, in order to read what’s revealed is clearly a difficult thing and I offer you my deepest sympathies.
That one click could take you to a blog where the whole article could be written well, with paragraphs and formatting, images could be embedded into the article, along with any videos that support your story. You could even have a comment section below where everyone could discuss the article together, in one place, not spread out over 20 conversations on 20 tweets.
GooberTheHat wrote:I follow them, but I find them less informative than they could be, and a more difficult way to digest that information than other mediums available.
The authors of these threads either have much more interesting and in depth information, which they can't convey adequately in a series of tweets, in which case a blog (or other similar medium) would be preferable. Or they don't, which means that their fairly superficial scratch the surface rambling on twitter doesn't effectively inform, so either leaves the reader feeling short changed and lacking information, or worse, of the opinion that they are suddenly aware of all the facts be cause they read a twitter thread and are therefore somehow now an expert on the subject.
Yossarian wrote:GooberTheHat wrote:I follow them, but I find them less informative than they could be, and a more difficult way to digest that information than other mediums available.
The authors of these threads either have much more interesting and in depth information, which they can't convey adequately in a series of tweets, in which case a blog (or other similar medium) would be preferable. Or they don't, which means that their fairly superficial scratch the surface rambling on twitter doesn't effectively inform, so either leaves the reader feeling short changed and lacking information, or worse, of the opinion that they are suddenly aware of all the facts be cause they read a twitter thread and are therefore somehow now an expert on the subject.
I’ve learnt far more about the investigation into Trump, particularly about the legal processes and timelines from Abramson’s Twitter than pretty much every other source combined.
If you don’t read these threads, then what exactly are you basing your claim that they can’t adequately inform on?
Tempy wrote:you're talking about losing anywhere from 40 to 80% of eyes in the transition.
monkey wrote:three of them were all chipping in and having a conversation with each other, which isn’t a format you can get anywhere else really.
monkey wrote:I follow a load of politics journalists and stuff and was reading a thread earlier where about three of them were all chipping in and having a conversation with each other, which isn’t a format you can get anywhere else really.
You don’t get to choose the people who are on tv and that you watch, the subjects are entirely generated by the broadcasters, you can’t instantly participate and so on.Andy wrote:monkey wrote:I follow a load of politics journalists and stuff and was reading a thread earlier where about three of them were all chipping in and having a conversation with each other, which isn’t a format you can get anywhere else really.
You’re right. There’s no way that could happen on TV or radio.
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!