<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>louisgray.com - Latest Comments in louisgray.com: Do You Trust Your Twitter News Sources?</title><link>http://louisgray.disqus.com/</link><description>A Silicon Valley Blog for Early Adopters and Tech Geeks</description><atom:link href="https://louisgray.disqus.com/louisgraycom_do_you_trust_your_twitter_news_sources/latest.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Fri, 16 Jan 2009 15:58:57 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: louisgray.com: Do You Trust Your Twitter News Sources?</title><link>http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/01/do-you-trust-your-twitter-news-sources.html#comment-5194229</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Thanks for this post, quite interesting but like everything else in life, news providers are not infallible are they. And you did the best thing you could do, double-check the facts. We just started:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://Twitter.com/WEFdavos" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://Twitter.com/WEFdavos"&gt;http://Twitter.com/WEFdavos&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;We hope not to make the same mistakes when it comes to reporting the latest about the World Economic forum meeting in Davos. Nevertheless, this weekend I continue cutting my time commitment as far as Twitter is concerned:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://commetrics.com/?p=864" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://commetrics.com/?p=864"&gt;http://commetrics.com/?p=864&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;It takes to much time.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Thanks for an interesting post and I will continue to double-check my Twitter sources to avoid this problem if at all possible.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Urs &lt;a href="http://Twitter.com/ComMetrics" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://Twitter.com/ComMetrics"&gt;http://Twitter.com/ComMetrics&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Urs E. Gattiker</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 16 Jan 2009 15:58:57 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: louisgray.com: Do You Trust Your Twitter News Sources?</title><link>http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/01/do-you-trust-your-twitter-news-sources.html#comment-5150284</link><description>&lt;p&gt;No problem and I agree. Being first when it comes to this field is actually becoming quite tedious, strenuous, and all around boring.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Corvida Raven</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 15 Jan 2009 15:46:54 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: louisgray.com: Do You Trust Your Twitter News Sources?</title><link>http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/01/do-you-trust-your-twitter-news-sources.html#comment-5139162</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Yes, but they are human. I saw a local anchor yesterday and she is blazing a trail using this stuff. She was asked this question as well, and her response was that she has gotten to know whom she can trust, and will cite them - but include "an online chat room visitor reports..." or "according to an chat room source..." indicating the source has not been validated.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;She also went on to say that she doesn't make a habit of this as the station has a policy of fact checking and confirmation. So you are right. I also would assert that we can't believe everything we hear. Ultimately the individual must take some level of responsibility for the information and determine how best to act (or react).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;So both, in a perfect world - right? You do, however, have a right to banish this source IMO.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">ChangeForge | Ken Stewart</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 15 Jan 2009 10:27:35 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: louisgray.com: Do You Trust Your Twitter News Sources?</title><link>http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/01/do-you-trust-your-twitter-news-sources.html#comment-5138594</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Mona, I also freaked when I saw that and started looking around.  I also sent them a message via Twitter, and they said it was a mistake.  They also lost some credibility with me because no followup message apologizing for the heinous error was published.  It definitely shows that you never take anything face value unless you see it in two news sources or more.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Shevonne</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 15 Jan 2009 09:39:13 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: louisgray.com: Do You Trust Your Twitter News Sources?</title><link>http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/01/do-you-trust-your-twitter-news-sources.html#comment-5137832</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I trust no single news source. I double check with 3+ source if it's relevant. &lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">needcaffeine</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 15 Jan 2009 07:59:05 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: louisgray.com: Do You Trust Your Twitter News Sources?</title><link>http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/01/do-you-trust-your-twitter-news-sources.html#comment-5136176</link><description>&lt;p&gt;hahahhaha LOVE how you threw the question back at me ;) I wrote up there to Jesse, but I do not trust just one source - I am border line anal and read multiple (global) sources in Japanese, English, British English, and Australian English (Inquisitr ftw!).But my question is, as Web 2.0 becomes more widely spread, there are people who trust 'bigger names' or users that have a lot of followers. Isn't it the responsibility of the news sources TO give us CORRECT information? The problem has extended beyond Twitter, and to major networks. ie: CNBC...&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Mona Nomura</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 15 Jan 2009 03:18:54 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: louisgray.com: Do You Trust Your Twitter News Sources?</title><link>http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/01/do-you-trust-your-twitter-news-sources.html#comment-5136122</link><description>&lt;p&gt;But what about the people that can't make those decisions, that don't check multiple sources, that rely on these so-called "trusted resources"? Shouldn't the retraction be left up so they can assess and draw their own conclusions? How many false alarms do we need? &lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Mona Nomura</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 15 Jan 2009 03:13:10 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: louisgray.com: Do You Trust Your Twitter News Sources?</title><link>http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/01/do-you-trust-your-twitter-news-sources.html#comment-5136084</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Hey Victor - definitely agreed. I use at least three US sources and a few global publications. But more and more, people are participating in sites and services where they can easily access information. What about hte people that don't double, triple, or quad check sources?&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Mona Nomura</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 15 Jan 2009 03:07:41 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: louisgray.com: Do You Trust Your Twitter News Sources?</title><link>http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/01/do-you-trust-your-twitter-news-sources.html#comment-5136098</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Ya - neither do I. I use it to keep up with headlines to stay in the loop, but unless I see it in my Reader from multiple sources, I don't trust or believe.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;I'm using Twitterfon which I love love love!&lt;br&gt;Thanks for the comment, Jesse :)&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Mona Nomura</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 15 Jan 2009 03:07:00 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: louisgray.com: Do You Trust Your Twitter News Sources?</title><link>http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/01/do-you-trust-your-twitter-news-sources.html#comment-5136050</link><description>&lt;p&gt;It sucks how we have to fact check everything now a days, since so many news sources are even more unreliable with the ease of publishing. Lately, I don't care to be the first that knows everything anymore lol&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Thanks for the comment :)&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Mona Nomura</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 15 Jan 2009 03:03:55 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: louisgray.com: Do You Trust Your Twitter News Sources?</title><link>http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/01/do-you-trust-your-twitter-news-sources.html#comment-5136064</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Since everyone has a different criteria of credibility, what are the boundaries? Who sets them? Not just with @BreakingNewsOn, but with all publications. - wow, I sound kind of paranoid LOL&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Mona Nomura</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 15 Jan 2009 03:03:27 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: louisgray.com: Do You Trust Your Twitter News Sources?</title><link>http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/01/do-you-trust-your-twitter-news-sources.html#comment-5136028</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Exactly - and people around here still remember 9-11 like it was yesterday. Terrible.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Mona Nomura</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 15 Jan 2009 03:01:00 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: louisgray.com: Do You Trust Your Twitter News Sources?</title><link>http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/01/do-you-trust-your-twitter-news-sources.html#comment-5127467</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Mona, umm... let me see news coming from a service called, "Twitter"? Didn't the microblogging service get it's name from the old saying, "A little birdie told me?"&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;How much do I trust gossip? Let me see - Not.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Don't get me wrong, I love juicy news just as much as anyone and really get glued to big news stories for days and weeks... but not from Twitter.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;My first reaction is just as Jesse suggested: Discover and then seek clarification and verification from another source. Now this is coming from the guy you showed how to use Google, though. So how much do you trust this source? ;-P&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">ChangeForge | Ken Stewart</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 14 Jan 2009 20:43:02 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: louisgray.com: Do You Trust Your Twitter News Sources?</title><link>http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/01/do-you-trust-your-twitter-news-sources.html#comment-5123221</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I don't use Twitter to get news from established sources. Twitter is a discovery source, where I like to get my news directly from the source. I use RSS for established news.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;What iPhone app are you using for Twitter? I love the organization of that - the others are so complex!&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Jesse Stay</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 14 Jan 2009 19:16:57 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: louisgray.com: Do You Trust Your Twitter News Sources?</title><link>http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/01/do-you-trust-your-twitter-news-sources.html#comment-5123745</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I think it's a huge mistake to trust any single news source.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Victor Ganata</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 14 Jan 2009 18:47:00 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: louisgray.com: Do You Trust Your Twitter News Sources?</title><link>http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/01/do-you-trust-your-twitter-news-sources.html#comment-5122716</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I think as these new forms of micropublishers emerge, they will have to compete with everyone else. If the credibility of a BreakingNewsOn suffers, for instance, people will not be as interested in what they have to publish/tweet. &lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Eric Berlin</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 14 Jan 2009 18:43:28 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: louisgray.com: Do You Trust Your Twitter News Sources?</title><link>http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/01/do-you-trust-your-twitter-news-sources.html#comment-5122565</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I trust most of my Twitter sources. Then again, it's up to us to also make sure that the facts are verified, which is why you went on to Google the statement that was made.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Corvida Raven</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 14 Jan 2009 18:37:16 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: louisgray.com: Do You Trust Your Twitter News Sources?</title><link>http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/01/do-you-trust-your-twitter-news-sources.html#comment-5123744</link><description>&lt;p&gt;More than I trust FoxNews&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Mike Reynolds</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 14 Jan 2009 18:32:00 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: louisgray.com: Do You Trust Your Twitter News Sources?</title><link>http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/01/do-you-trust-your-twitter-news-sources.html#comment-5121932</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I agree Louis, especially in NYC, be careful about what you say.  I think overall you have to give these top resources the benefit of the doubt.  You can always make your own decisions within seconds whether you trust them or not.  People/sources that cry wolf will gain bad PR very quickly.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Craig</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 14 Jan 2009 18:01:23 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: louisgray.com: Do You Trust Your Twitter News Sources?</title><link>http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/01/do-you-trust-your-twitter-news-sources.html#comment-5121684</link><description>&lt;p&gt;My biggest issue @BreakingNewsOn in this example is that if there is a EXPLOSION that ROCKS MANHATTAN... you better darn well make sure its true. That's like yelling FIRE in a downtown theater. Doesn't anybody think NYC is a little weary of bomb threats, real or otherwise? I don't care where the news "breaks"... get it right. &lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Louis Gray</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 14 Jan 2009 17:47:52 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: louisgray.com: Do You Trust Your Twitter News Sources?</title><link>http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/01/do-you-trust-your-twitter-news-sources.html#comment-5121567</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I don't think my iTouch has the screenshot magic.  Maybe I just never noticed.  Yet another reason my Touch isn't as cool as the real thing.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;As much as I agree that glossing over the failures of a news organization is a bad idea the design of twitter just doesn't allow for the sort of post-hoc clarifications we really need.  No threading, no annotation, no nothing.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Thanks for the kind wishes, we're doing pretty well!&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Daniel J. Pritchett</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 14 Jan 2009 17:41:58 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: louisgray.com: Do You Trust Your Twitter News Sources?</title><link>http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/01/do-you-trust-your-twitter-news-sources.html#comment-5121512</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Hey Daniel! The iPhone has screen shot capabilities. :) And I am glad Twitter Search displays the cached Tweets - actually, LG just told me about them before I published.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;As for Tweet retractions, I think it's OK for Tweets to be deleted but retractions should stay intact. We are all human and allowed mistakes, admitting mistakes would make a person more credible - especially from a "news source". Thing that concerns me the most is, with the ease of content publishing, mistakes WILL happen, and since we will soon live in an all digitized age, certain guidelines should be set. I am all about free CORRECT speech. ;) Thanks for the comment - hope all is well.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Mona Nomura</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 14 Jan 2009 17:37:17 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: louisgray.com: Do You Trust Your Twitter News Sources?</title><link>http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/01/do-you-trust-your-twitter-news-sources.html#comment-5120936</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Woah, where do the amazing iPhone screenshots come from?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;I'm also kinda freaked out by Twitter Search's refusal to forget anything ever.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Daniel J. Pritchett</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 14 Jan 2009 17:08:53 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: louisgray.com: Do You Trust Your Twitter News Sources?</title><link>http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/01/do-you-trust-your-twitter-news-sources.html#comment-5120956</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I'm okay with people retracting tweets, even news agencies.  Someone on FF mentioned yesterday that the average drive-by reader won't notice the retraction if it comes in a later tweet.  Some bad tweets just need to disappear.  EDIT:  At least until we can annotate them with our explanations after the fact.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Daniel J. Pritchett</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 14 Jan 2009 17:07:34 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: louisgray.com: Do You Trust Your Twitter News Sources?</title><link>http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/01/do-you-trust-your-twitter-news-sources.html#comment-5121928</link><description>&lt;p&gt;The thing about using Twitter as a news source is you have to wait for the picture to resolve. It is like a Polaroid - the first tweets are often sent as soon and the film ejects from the camera... it is only as time passes that the picture clarifies. What Twitter does is allow you to "tune in" if it interests you and watch it develop in real time.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Brian Roy</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 14 Jan 2009 16:59:00 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>