The Truth According to Twitter

Photo Credit: Alan LightThree incidents last week showed the extraordinary ability of Twitter to spread unfounded rumors. The first, and most publicized, dealt with the premature announcement of the death of actor Patrick Swayze. The BBC reported that a Florida radio station, KISS FM, posted a tweet saying that Mr. Swayze, currently suffering from pancreatic cancer, had died. This was not the case. His publicist released a statement saying that "contrary to reckless reports," Mr. Swayze is alive and responding well to treatment.

Meanwhile, at roughly the same time, The Register noted that a person using the name Nick Brown, the Labour chief whip in the United Kingdom, had issued the following tweet:

the new speaker will have only a few weeks to get settled in before the election is called

This was considered breaking news in British politics as it implied that Gordon Brown, the prime minister, was preparing to call a general election in the fall. Previously, he had denied any intention of doing so. After being widely reported in the media, it was found that the posting was a fake sent from an account that had been deleted soon after.

Finally, an article in the Boston Herald told of Pittsburgh Steelers quarterback, Ben Roethlisberger, denying rumors that he has skin cancer. Postings under his name on numerous social networking sites, including Twitter, claimed otherwise. Mr. Roethlisberger told the media that he is not active in the online community. His agent said that they are working to stop the impostors and correct the misinformation that they had spread.

Twitter's immediacy and intimacy make it ideal for communicating information quickly and to a great number of people. Although a national television broadcast may be best at addressing a large, captive audience at any single moment, various applications allow users to view their Twitter feeds from just about anywhere, whether from a PC or a cell phone. This unique outreach gives Twitter enormous power, or the potential thereof, among those who use it. This aspect was even cited by one of its competitors. The Guardian wrote that during a conference last week, Google's co-founder, Larry Page, admitted "that the company has been losing out to Twitter in the race to meet web user's demand for real-time information."

But as with all power, there are corrupting influences and abuses. In the case of the tweet purportedly issued by the Labour Party official in the U.K., the lightening speed of its dissemination allowed little reflection of the facts at hand. For a while, much of the political community took this information as fact, and it was reported in the media as such. Few questioned the validity of the source or bothered to investigate further.

We are accustomed to questioning the truthfulness of the news conveyed by traditional media. In fact, children are routinely taught at a young age that you cannot believe everything you read or hear. But with each advance in communication technology, it's seems to be a lesson that needs to be learned anew. With Twitter, the ease in which one can pose as an imposter or spread misinformation requires greater vigilance on the part of all involved.

Mr. Roethlisberger was an even more direct victim of identity theft, a topic previously covered here. For anyone viewing the lies posted by the impostor, there was no apparent way to confirm whether or not the author was Mr. Roethlisberger. Unfortunately, even if most assumed it was a misdirection, it only took a few individuals to spread the gossip thus forcing Mr. Roethlisberger to respond.

The incident involving Mr. Swayze is the most insidious and challenging to the notion that Twitter can be a productive part of journalism as many hope it can become. One should not confuse Twitter's ability to convey information efficiently with the veracity of said information. Even though the radio station removed the mistaken tweet shortly thereafter, the incident made its way from the online world to the traditional news outlets.

Unfortunately, at that point, it assumes the imprimatur of a more respected source. A theoretical example: a report on CNN of breaking news may claim properly that their source is Twitter. But subsequent reports on other news outlets may say that their source is CNN. The original source, one which deserves skepticism, is lost in the shuffle. And so it goes.

Mark Twain said it best: "A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on." Twitter exemplified.