5 ms·
Why Twitter (or any social media, Reddt, FB, HN, Snap, etc) needs to be considered a source of truth or honestly is beyond me. It's no different than listening
by ProAm 9y ago
Why Twitter (or any social media, Reddt, FB, HN, Snap, etc) needs to be considered a source of truth or honestly is beyond me. It's no different than listening to a stranger in real life.
- matt4077 9y agoEither words have meaning or they don't. If they don't, Social Media, newspapers, podcasts, and everything else could just shut down. If they do, If they do, it's important that we at least have the sort of context clues about the source of information and their reliability that we have in real life.
- ProAm 9y agoThey don't. Do you think Twitter cares if they have truth or DAU and advertisers?
- duxup 9y agoI think it is less about being the truth and what exactly you're doing business hosting and what the end results might be.
- helthanatos 9y agoThey should probably reduce the amount of spam. It makes for a better experience and uses less server space... However, I don't believe they do it near well enough to be considered "fair" especially because they do it mostly manually and the people doing it are partial in some direction.
- scarface74 9y agoIt's definitely not about the "server space". The cost of server space is infinitesimal. At least on Facebook, if you have a business, you pay for increased intention. The more of your followers who are fake, you're paying for useless views. Why would anyone want fake followers except to boost their own ego? Unless you're an "influencer" and getting paid based on your follower count?