I don't have a Twitter account, but on occasion I do go on there out of curiosity to see what is trending. It has its uses, but you are correct that its users aren't a microcosm of what Americans collectively think, broadly speaking. If I didn't go on to Twitter last night to see what was going on, I would have had no idea about the Toyota donations. That in addition to whatever other outrage was trending there. I personally don't think its that big of a deal, as corporations donate with more than anything else, their collective self-interest and self-preservation in mind. And they'll most often donate to elected officials in both parties as a result. I'm planning to buy a car soon, and have been looking at Toyotas along with other makes. How the car drives, its fit and finish/reliability, and the price are what matter to most consumers, and not their political donations. The same applies to corporations perceived to be "on the left", such as Nike, Apple(I use products from both), among others. Give it several days, and the online crowd will move on to other outrages. In any case, the free market will sort such things out, as it usually does.
I think the ire of this piece is misplaced: it's not that people get their news from online sources, but limit themselves to one source - and one that only shows them either what they *want* to see or the algorithm decides to show them based on their follows/clicks.
From a Twitter-specific perspective: I saw the building collapse multiple times on the day it had happened, and other shares from those continuing to follow the story. Is the complaint that people didn't continue to post Tweets about the matter over the weekend, thus it wasn't in the Trending Topics?
I'm very curious why you'd think that Twitter would/should mirror the morning news more so than it does. It's a conversational platform, so people are going to talk about things they can weigh in on. Kind of like how in the mid-Aughts, I hung out and talked to friends about "Battlestar Galactica" over the watecooler instead of George W. Bush's latest thing.
If it makes you feel better, I'm pretty connected news-wise (though NOT on Twitter) and you're the first I'm hearing about the Toyota donations. As far as the condo collapse, that's been Story #1 on both local (Chicago) stations as well as national news shows since it happened.
If sounds like you don't like Twitter - you're 100% free to leave it. I've been off it for the better part of a decade (after someone took over and erased my account and Twitter wasn't ANY help in recovering it), and I don't feel like I'm any less informed than the folks who seem to pay close attention to it.
I don't have a Twitter account, but on occasion I do go on there out of curiosity to see what is trending. It has its uses, but you are correct that its users aren't a microcosm of what Americans collectively think, broadly speaking. If I didn't go on to Twitter last night to see what was going on, I would have had no idea about the Toyota donations. That in addition to whatever other outrage was trending there. I personally don't think its that big of a deal, as corporations donate with more than anything else, their collective self-interest and self-preservation in mind. And they'll most often donate to elected officials in both parties as a result. I'm planning to buy a car soon, and have been looking at Toyotas along with other makes. How the car drives, its fit and finish/reliability, and the price are what matter to most consumers, and not their political donations. The same applies to corporations perceived to be "on the left", such as Nike, Apple(I use products from both), among others. Give it several days, and the online crowd will move on to other outrages. In any case, the free market will sort such things out, as it usually does.
I think the ire of this piece is misplaced: it's not that people get their news from online sources, but limit themselves to one source - and one that only shows them either what they *want* to see or the algorithm decides to show them based on their follows/clicks.
From a Twitter-specific perspective: I saw the building collapse multiple times on the day it had happened, and other shares from those continuing to follow the story. Is the complaint that people didn't continue to post Tweets about the matter over the weekend, thus it wasn't in the Trending Topics?
I'm very curious why you'd think that Twitter would/should mirror the morning news more so than it does. It's a conversational platform, so people are going to talk about things they can weigh in on. Kind of like how in the mid-Aughts, I hung out and talked to friends about "Battlestar Galactica" over the watecooler instead of George W. Bush's latest thing.
If it makes you feel better, I'm pretty connected news-wise (though NOT on Twitter) and you're the first I'm hearing about the Toyota donations. As far as the condo collapse, that's been Story #1 on both local (Chicago) stations as well as national news shows since it happened.
If sounds like you don't like Twitter - you're 100% free to leave it. I've been off it for the better part of a decade (after someone took over and erased my account and Twitter wasn't ANY help in recovering it), and I don't feel like I'm any less informed than the folks who seem to pay close attention to it.