It seems a bit rash to take as a given that journalists "insist that Twitter is the place where their job happens" while at the same time rejecting the common a

It seems a bit rash to take as a given that journalists "insist that Twitter is the place where their job happens" while at the same time rejecting the common assumption that follower count is generally a proxy for importance. As far as I am aware, it is easy to read anyone's public statements on Twitter without following them and private messages are obviously inherently private. It seems fairly reasonable for journalists to conduct their work in that public forum without without tacitly endorsing white supremacy. With that said, I am not really sure what your point is. Could you please clarify?