Facebook or Twitter; who’s the news big-hitter?
March 17, 2010 at 4:20 pm smilejames 15 comments
This blog has talked a lot about social media’s power in breaking news. In particular Twitter has been hoisted above the others, spoken of in hushed, reverential tones.
New evidence from Hitwise, an internet traffic monitoring service, says we shouldn’t be so quick to shower it with affection and sycophantic praise.
Google News and Facebook are among many websites that people access breaking news from… Twitter is all the way down in 39th place, contributing just 0.14 percent of traffic to news and media sites.
More data to suggest that the media may have jumped on the bandwagon too early or is the wagon going so fast it won’t slow down?
James
Entry filed under: Discussion. Tags: .
1.
Stefanie Aguirre | March 17, 2010 at 9:41 pm
I think it’s ridiculous that more and more young people are using facebook and twitter to get their SOLE news. Why? Well, because people are not fully informing themselves by reading proper and longer news stories. However, people find out news like when the first premier league matches are, what famous person has died, and other current affairs through their friends’ personal status updates.
Also a lot of news agencies have facebook and twitter groups with their latest news, which people can sign up to and watch.
And there’s always a friend on facebook or twitter with a news update or a link to a news video.
2.
Stuart Oates | March 19, 2010 at 10:41 am
I disagree that is’s sad that people use social networking site for their sole source of news. As you said, if you follow the right person or group you can get comprehensive news stories from their pages which include exactly the same content as you may find on their original sources. It would however be very sad if people only relied on their friends status updates! But I don’t really believe that anyone would do that. And if they do, then even this is better than getting no news at all, as I suspect would otherwise be the case with this type of person.
I’m sure that nearly everyone who starts with social networking sites as their source of news would click through to a news story. If not, we’re doomed!
3.
montster499 | March 20, 2010 at 4:44 pm
It fascinates me that there are some who rely on Twitter or Facebook to gain their breaking news. Of course there are some moments when social networking sites can produce golden news stories – one sentence is all that’s needed and a story is created. In an ideal world people would balance Tweets and Facebook updates with a variety of other different news sources, Personally speaking, I know that I make every effort to check BBC, Sky and the Times every day to suppement my Twitter and Facebook addiction.
I suppose it could be interpreted as ‘sad’ that some youngsters only rely on these limited social networking sources for obtaining their news, especially considering there are so many diverse and educational news outlets available on the internet.
4.
Stuart Oates | March 19, 2010 at 10:35 am
Twitter is an interesting site that I am using more and more. I think the reason that the media have embraced it more than the general public is simple. It’s a tool and not a socialising site. Follow to right people and you can use it to get updates from ‘trusted’ sources, in far simpler means than using social networking sites such as facebook. I’ve been twittering like many other journalists and organisations directly from the source of the information – via text message from a disaster zone in Uganda. There is simply no other alternative for me to get snippets of news back to people in the UK by the fastest means possible. I’d consider it a first point of contact of news to the UK. In many cases it is a primary source of news. It is up to journalists and individuals to filter this information and disseminate it across all mediums including Facebook and other traditional news sources to the masses.
5.
Iain | March 19, 2010 at 12:11 pm
Could twitters low ranking be due to its members being less active. A study recently showed that although many people have accounts on twitter, lots of them are unused. Facebook users are much more active and so, people regualrly use the site and news is broken on it more.
Here’s the link to the study: http://crave.cnet.co.uk/software/0,39029471,49304900,00.htm?s_cid=33
6.
Rosie Brown | March 20, 2010 at 3:04 pm
I think you’re right Iain. I myself have had a twitter account for some time, but only recently started to gain the benefits of it. And even then, I’d say it is a clear third below google and facebook. As much as its unique, 140 character selling-point is perfect to get hold of basic information, facebook offers so much more in terms of social interaction.
My recent experience with BBC World Have Your Say however really taught me the importance of utilising every available search engine on the internet. Set with the task of getting hold of people across the globe, who held strong opinions on the topic of the day, twitter and facebook groups often came up with the goods. These search methods definitely complimented, and sometimes superseded traditional search methods.
I also followed the recent Chilean earthquake unfold over twitter – it was really fascinating to get live, up–to-date reports from the ground in Chilie.
Its horses for courses in my opinion. What suits one situation, may not suit another.
7.
rosssatron | March 20, 2010 at 10:09 pm
Twitter is a great tool for many areas of the market. But like you said yourself Rosie it took you a while to adapt to its many uses. I think it is a great first port of call for journalists to discover a story, leak or bit of gossip. You would then develope that story using other copious sources of information, such as newspapers, broadcasters and online news sites.
Also Twitter gives people the freedom, and also safety to leak news without the threat of being identified.
This has its negatives aspects too. How can you trust what you see on Twitter? Not all ‘Twitterers’ or ‘Twits’ (have they developed a name yet) are certified as being who they say they are.
Again it comes down to media literacy; think before you trust.
8.
smile2010 | March 21, 2010 at 10:45 am
I think it is interesting how many news organisations and media companies are using social media rather than email to get in touch with people.
According to Joel Leyden from Israel News Agency: “When TIME Magazine, CNN and FOX News try to contact me – it is no longer through email – they are tracking me down through Facebook or LinkedIn.”
Baring in mind that Facebook now have more than 400 million active users and 50% of their active users log on in any given day it’s an easy way to reach your audiences and build relationships with them. With more than 5 billion pieces of content (web links, news stories, blog posts, notes, photo albums, etc.) shared each week it’s not so strange people find their news on Facebook.
Sofia
9.
lydiasmears | March 21, 2010 at 11:20 am
I think that part of the reason Twitter has roused so much interest is because of its format. You can trawl Google news for stories, but you have to sift through different pages, and navigate your way through the rocky mountains of variously shaped articles and documents available.
Twitter gives you a tidbit of information in 140 characters. Because the format is so uniform, it gives you a snippet of something that’s RELEVANT. So whatever you’re searching will be related to the given topic.
The “micro” aspect of Twitter means that the information needed is in a distilled format. You don’t have to wade through paragraphs in order to find the important line. Twitter is essentially a maelstrom of “news one-liners”.
I think that may be part of the reason that Twitter as a site has such critical acclaim. Even if it doesn’t rank very highly in this latest table, I think it’s partly generated so much media interest simply because of its unique and innovative style.
10.
rjnewsome | March 21, 2010 at 11:26 am
I think it’s a great thing that younger people are getting news from Twitter/Facebook etc.
There are many young people in the country who switch off the tv as soon as the news comes on and never read papers.
So, social networking sites may actually be raising the amount of news they discover rather than reducing it.
11.
gjbherman | March 21, 2010 at 12:39 pm
I agree with Rob and Stu here. It’s the immediacy of facebook and twitter that make it so appealing to so many young people. Lets not forget that people aren’t just reading news from other peoples posts on facebook, there are various apps that filter news and present it to you.
With regards to twitter, if you can avoid the middle man and hear the news straight from the horses mouth than all the better. You may also be able to avoid the journalists take on the story and make up your mind for yourself.
12.
hushedup | March 21, 2010 at 1:20 pm
I agree with Rob, there are far worse sources of news than social media sites. Just putting it out there – what’s more dubious, Twitter or News of the World?
And another thing, the news content of some local newspapers is equally lacking. Some of their 500 word stories could probably be shortened to 140 characters without losing any of the relevant information or details.
Emily
13.
Rosie Brown | March 21, 2010 at 2:17 pm
It’s all about the top-line, right?!
14.
zoegraham | March 21, 2010 at 6:48 pm
I guess it depends what we are qualifying as news. I think it is dangerous for people to rely solely on twitter or facebook to just get the topline and the immediate tit bit. If longer reporting styles die out, so will people’s customs of reading in-depth analysis and reportage. Changing platforms of ‘news’ may also alter what people start to qualify as news.
15.
rjnewsome | March 21, 2010 at 8:53 pm
Facebook to beat google news – http://www.newsfactor.com/news/Facebook-Beating-Google-Once-Again/story.xhtml?story_id=11000CHH1U5I