Elon Musk, X and the end of tweeted articles
I agree with this and I've noticed the same, as a member of the media who came through the 2010s on Twitter. Articles don't travel anymore. I have mixed feelings - I care more about the written word, but the amount of effort devoted to Twitter was ultimately counterproductive - and to me, it's all an argument for newsletters and news publications that can build up their own subscriber bases and email lists. It's why I care about my own Substack. No matter what happens with X or any media outlet, I will carry my thousand-something email list with me. It's a durable investment.
I still can't believe people care about Twitter. I know they do. I know people use it. But I just can't process it.
I just plopped down my nine bucks for this newsletter and felt immediately rewarded by this post. Validated everything I am seeing on the hell site.
TWTR is actively suppressing Substack, as Taibbi and @Doomberg have noted. Doomberg runs the most popular Finance Substack, and they've totally left Twitter. They have their Twitter acct on lurker mode, and use Substack Notes now, exclusively.
Why fight the algorithm, when you can build on a platform that has helped and rewarded you?
Of course, what went "viral" was the headline and the photo, and not the actual article. Many people saw the headline and even RT'd the link Tweet without even reading the actual article. This led to some squishy accountability, as a nuanced article could have a sensationalist headline, and if the writer was called on it, could claim they didn't write the headline.
Now, Twitter/X is essentially saying all the context has to be in the Tweet. It seems like this would be bad, as it would mean the nuance would be gone, but I don't think it was effectively there in the first place.
I remember reading this ( https://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/31/technology/31iht-chinet.1861775.html ) when I was young through a certain kind of chauvinistic and quasi-orientalist prism. And a mere decade later here America was (a valuable lesson that in many things we think we are ahead, we are actually behind).
We produce and produced lots of truly incredible journalism. I don’t think much of that stuff ever went viral though. The death of article virality is probably a good trade off if it is a result of a change that makes internet mobs forming marginally less common.
Who cares about fucking twitter? It was always terrible, and it’s good it’s dying. Maybe journalism can become 92% horseshit instead of 97% horseshit if journalists break their addiction to it?
You have to break down the article
These guys are crushing it on Twitter essentially repackaging old news with images.
They tweet out the links to individual sources, but share a narrative in the process. More than just tweeting old the article link
Emma Carmichael, like everyone associated with Gawker, is white trash, Ethan. Jesus.
Fantastic, Ethan. I’ve noticed this as well. Thank you for explaining it all as only you can.