DashRiprock
Experienced member
- Messages
- 1,650
- Likes
- 482
To what extend to you all think that social media, and specifically the "reporting" of "news", (quotes intended as derisory), impacts the markets longer term?
Two recent examples:
- The slating of William Hague over Libya
- The risk of Nuclear fallout in Japan
Both were/are totally exaggerated by use of things like twitter, where you have Car mechanic Dave Smith and his Hairdresser wife Sarah (accompanied with 12yr old Jack and 8yr old Britney) reporting from the thomas cook hospitality suite in sharm-el-sheik on the socio and political situation, and likelihood of a retaliatory coup d'état, in egypt. Or the correct way to handle a clandestine insertion of a team of SAS and MI6 officers into eastern Libya in order to establish links with the rebel group, and no doubt arrange for appropriate support to be made available to them. Or on how likely a nuclear fallout is ***ushima and what the consequences could be.
I mean, free speech and all, but we've all played chinese whispers, right?
is Twitter the new Reuters?
Not, I hasten to add, because of the quality of reporting. In that regard, reuters are a world leading news agency, and twitter will remain the sum of its parts. But, much like playground rumors spread like wildfire, the proliferation of media outlets has created a force of twitter (et al) users who just seem to report whatever they hear from someone else.
In the short term, there is negligible effect, but lest you forget that these people can vote, have ISA's, pensions, mortgages, credit cards and household bills. And if twitter slags of William Hague enough, you can expect him to be "re-shuffled" (look at the situation with Kan and Jack Bauer now).
I don't actually mean that twitter is a substitute for reuters, but that "alternative' news sources are gaining a significant amount of influence even if the credibility of the "news" that is reported doesn't punch it's weight.
what do you think?
Two recent examples:
- The slating of William Hague over Libya
- The risk of Nuclear fallout in Japan
Both were/are totally exaggerated by use of things like twitter, where you have Car mechanic Dave Smith and his Hairdresser wife Sarah (accompanied with 12yr old Jack and 8yr old Britney) reporting from the thomas cook hospitality suite in sharm-el-sheik on the socio and political situation, and likelihood of a retaliatory coup d'état, in egypt. Or the correct way to handle a clandestine insertion of a team of SAS and MI6 officers into eastern Libya in order to establish links with the rebel group, and no doubt arrange for appropriate support to be made available to them. Or on how likely a nuclear fallout is ***ushima and what the consequences could be.
I mean, free speech and all, but we've all played chinese whispers, right?
is Twitter the new Reuters?
Not, I hasten to add, because of the quality of reporting. In that regard, reuters are a world leading news agency, and twitter will remain the sum of its parts. But, much like playground rumors spread like wildfire, the proliferation of media outlets has created a force of twitter (et al) users who just seem to report whatever they hear from someone else.
In the short term, there is negligible effect, but lest you forget that these people can vote, have ISA's, pensions, mortgages, credit cards and household bills. And if twitter slags of William Hague enough, you can expect him to be "re-shuffled" (look at the situation with Kan and Jack Bauer now).
I don't actually mean that twitter is a substitute for reuters, but that "alternative' news sources are gaining a significant amount of influence even if the credibility of the "news" that is reported doesn't punch it's weight.
what do you think?
