Twitter

It is a top-10 referrer for our paper.

NY Times too!

http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/20090921/the-new-york-times-brought-to-you-literally-by-twitter/

 

Why do people who write for newspapers have to put in qualifiers like this person? This guy obviously hates twitter but he has to write "there's a legitimate use for twitter don't get me wrong."
He puts that in there so he doesn't get fired. Cause all higher ups love twitter. The guy loses all credibility when he has to put in a qualifier. Just man up and write you hate twitter.

Look, twitter has one function: to link to stories. Anything else is b.s. and none of it makes the newspaper a dime anyway, because websites are not profitable.
Fine, use it to link to stories, but making reporters tweet on there about things is just a waste of time.

 

I don't understand it and I don't think a lot of people are following it for us, but I'm doing it in case I get another job that wants me to. I text most of my stuff with in-game thoughts, so I'm having some fun with it.

 

Retweeting...

 

#truth

 

Mp paper's Twitter feed is just links. No context. Here's an example "http://bit.ly/(something)"

That's all there is and if anyone thinks there is value in that, they are idiots.

Of course some of the "geniuses" at my paper think that allowing people to see newspaper ads on the Web just as they are in print would bring in tons of cash. This is off-topic, but the main problem with Web advertising in newspapers is that ads aren't relevant and offer no value. I need to know what I could save. Tell me about a sale or what you offer. Just a line ad online won't do it.

 

Stitch speaks the truth.

So does Fredrick. But this post was to praise Stitch. Stitch speaks the truth.

 

I don't blame Twitter, but I want to know how it helps the paper. Twitter's burning through cash as well.

 

I must be wrong about Twitter. This guy used it to get a job.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34368627/ns/business-careers/

Personally, I use Twitter, but it's a waste of time.