Earlier quoted context omitted.
How does this make any sense? Why should you distrust news because they report on inconsequential stuff? Whatever is on twitter is still a real fact because they repeat, verbatim what people post on it. Distrust implies they're lying to you, when most of the time they aren't.
> "Whatever is on twitter is still a real fact because they repeat, verbatim what people post on it." This, right here, is the problem. Something is not a FACT just because it's being repeated over and over on Twitter. In fact, I have a feeling the correlation between accuracy and Twitter-repetition is probably inverse.
You completely misunderstood what I meant.
For example, if someone Tweets that the earth is flat and the news reports this statement, the reported statement is fact because someone can go to Twitter and read that profiles tweets and there's clear evidence that this account represents said person, even if they didn't physically write the tweet.
The tweet itself is not fact, for obvious reasons. You can apply this to any ignorant statement anyone has ever uttered.
This is what I hear, as an avid news listener, whenever a tweet is the subject. Its simply someones written, public testimony. To not report these things, makes no sense.