I wish authors of papers like this would publish an online tool to demonstrate their findings. I think a demonstration of this particular paper would be much le

I wish authors of papers like this would publish an online tool to demonstrate their findings. I think a demonstration of this particular paper would be much less impressive then their misleading charts[1] try and make it out to be. For example, they excluded retweets but what about replies? When your friend asks you about [TOPIC] in a tweet, of course your reply is going to be related to [TOPIC]. What about Twitter users who mostly use it to comment on breaking news? Of course 90% of the words are going to be predictable, but it's the 10% that are different and important. [1] - None of their charts have y-axis starting at 0, leading to a much more extreme-looking difference in results. https://arxiv.org/pdf/1708.04575.pdf https://arxiv.org/pdf/1708.04575.pdf