Journalist writes article talking about how they come to realize what they all initially believed - that "twitter wasn't worth the effort"
as justification they go on to use NPR as an example to write this...
A memo circulated to NPR staff says traffic has dropped by only a single percentage point as a result of leaving Twitter,
however they later say "accounted for just under two percent of traffic before the posting stopped. "
and while that's relatively minor, then they go on to talk about how NPR created a blog site in the aftermath of a race related shooting as an alternative to twitter. How was that blog successful without twitter?
Rosenberg says. Instead of rejoining Twitter, KCUR set up a live blog and focused on posting to other social networks. NPR’s editors worked with the station to refine SEO and help spread the story. Even though the station itself wasn’t posting to Twitter, Rosenberg says the
story found an audience anyway because very engaged local Twitter users shared the piece with their networks. so they didn't post the story on twitter, but twitter users linked the blog site on twitter for other people to see
---------
in the scheme of things, this isn't a big story but its just another example of journalist deciding to create a narrative they want the public to believe with a disregard of the facts. This is essentially all drudgereport is anymore. Its never been just basic news but Drudge is so anti-Trump now, and anyone who associates or may enable Trump gets caught in their crosshairs too. And yes, this article was on DrudgeReport.
if you want to read the article its here
https://niemanreports.org/articles/npr-twitter-musk/
