Can someone tell me why CNN wants to make the Iran situation about Twitter?

[RB TexLa]

I understand they wanted to make the election about the economy because of their ad rates and buy rates. What is the relationship with Twitter that is causing this from them?

[meegbear]

1. The Iranian government has been shutting down other media outlets ...

they have not been able to shut down Twitter, so this is how a lot of the information is getting out.

[RB TexLa]

5. They were over focusing on it before they shut down foreign news reporting

[Billy Burnett]

22. So did the Obama admin

The Obama's admin shut down MS's, Yahoo's, Google's, AIM's, IM services in Iran a few weeks ago should cause one to ask a couple of questions. Why would this admin shut down the primary organizing methodology (IM-ing) of the opposition, limiting them to 140 characters? Why would the Obama admin aggressively go after the IM services after 10 years of non enforcement right before these elections?

After doing this, NOW the admin is asking Twitter to stay online because it is now the primary communication methodology to the West.

I don't know the answers, but something reeks about the move shutting IM-ing down in Iran by our government at this time.

Why this is going unreported is beyond me. :shrug:


-Do you know that the Obama admin shut down MS, Yahoo, Google, Messenger to Iran last month?-
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x5863428

[meegbear]

25. I did not know about that ...

damn!

[tekisui]

2. Like Google, and other internet start-ups, Twitter will be worth big

bucks one day. The only companies that will be able to afford to buy it are the big media companies. CNN and others could benefit from pumping Twitter up, in hopes of owning it one day.

[sellitman]

4. Google already passed on buying Twitter.

I think that was a HUGE mistake.

[sellitman]

3. You can follow Iran's election turmoil by

Searching for iranelection in Twitter. Then follow specific Twitter accounts from that country.

Beware of imposter though.

[Billy Burnett]

26. How can you tell who the imposters are?

We've seen instructions posted on DU on how to change twitter settings to make it appear that you are tweeting from Iran, as well as instructions to set up proxy servers for Iran tweets.

Who knows who is tweeting?

[sellitman]

30. Intuition is the only way.

It's not exacting but then again the MSM isn't either.

[WeDidIt]

6. So that they can report on a FABULOUS IPO from Twitter

in a few months.

[KharmaTrain]

7. New Bright Shiny Toy

I've totally given up on Chicken Noodle Nuze. It used to be they were on my teevee 24/7...especially when an International incident broke. Not any more.

To me, their tauting of Twitter and online "reporters" shows how cheap and dumbed down news has become. It deflects attention away from the fact their highly vaunted news department has nothing...few if any reporters in the region, yet with any direct relationship with the story. It also kills a lot of wasted airtime...cheaper to read Twits than pay a real journalist to report real news. Most of what they air is opinion rather than news...propaganda rather than information.

Some corporate brainstem at CNN also thinks that by showing how "tech saavy" they are this will somehow attract younger viewers. To me its a waste of electrons on both ends. Thus CNN is all but a forgotten memory here.

[madeline_con]

21. That's an interesting perspective.

I noticed there really isn't very much in the way of news; just twits, some vidoe and then an "expert" is trotted out for comment.

You mentioned the propoganda. They interviewed an actress who "felt compelled" to portray the mother of a girl who was stoned to death. If she was so shocked, it seems to me these stonings must be few and far between, and only practiced in remote areas by the less educated. It was the same old "look how barbaric these people are" crap that only serves to villify the Iraniams as a whole to the dim-witted of the U.S.

That's my take on it, anyway.

[ColbertWatcher]

32. Did the actress look like this ...

???

Did she have a "husky" voice similar to Kathleen Turner's?

[ColbertWatcher]

36. Am I on ignore? n/t

[Kaleko]

29. Karmic comeuppance. CNN and the rest of the propaganda organs are becoming obsolete.

Anyone with a web connection can be better informed than Wolf Blitzer. To determine a credible news source, all we need is a finely honed bullshit detector. Phonies and agitators do reveal themselves, usually in very short order. The blogosphere, which includes Twitter, has become cutting edge media.

[RandomThoughts]

8. One of the important ways to control people is to keep them from thinking.

Although in a situation like Iran, Tweeter fits pretty good, fast quick messages.

In life if you want to inspire thoughtful conversation and thinking Twitter sucks.

Twitter creates bumper sticker label thinking, since you can not explain your point in 140 words, it does not allow for thinking in paragraphs. And the parts that want to control people want to keep people dumb, and moving Internet to slogans like soundbites on TV is the intent of pushing twitter hard.

If this post was on twitter it would only say the bold part without giving my reasoning, which might inspire thought or rebuttal and actual thinking.

They saw the soundbite destroy any real news, so they want to make the internet the same way. Take out the context and what someone says can mean what the filter wants it to mean.

[ThomWV]

11. as well as giving them unimportant things to occupy their minds

Iran is no more a threat to the United States than Peru.

[grannie4peace]

9. at least they are talking about it

[ThomWV]

10. Honest answer? Because it does not entail the cost of a Reporter

To report news requires that you hire and pay the expenses of a Reporter. To report internet chatter only requires that you hire someone to sit in front of a screen and cut and past excerpts from what passes in front of them to a talking head to repeat.

We don't get news because it costs money to collect news.

[BlooInBloo]

12. Overreaction from the #CNNFail hashtag.

[ColbertWatcher]

33. I forgot all about that. I think you're correct! n/t

[zipplewrath]

13. CNN wants to be hip

They have launched on an effort to try to appeal to the younger audience by using the various social networking tools. It seredipitously coincided with this uprising and that association with the tools.

[SoCalDem]

16. and it can replace the costs of having to have actual paid reporters everywhere

:)

[Marr]

19. The way all these media outlets suddenly "discovered" Twitter a couple

of months ago really made me do a double take. My first suspicion was that their parent company had purchased Twitter and was engaging in news/advertising, but apparently that's not the case. I'm inclined to go with your explanation-- they just want to look hip.

[marshall]

14. CNN caters to an American audience

And American audiences seem to be fascinated by Twitter.

[Captain Hilts]

15. Because we want it to be about us. nt

[Wizard777]

17. Because the internet and twitter is delivering power to the people.

Something even our own Congress cannot and will not do. I can remember the days when Bush would have gotten away with every last lie. But because of the internet. All his lies and treachery were exposed. They days of one way conversations from our government are gone. Now our government says, We are evil bastards and you love us for it. Now we REPLY, No you are evil bastards and we will hang you for it! WEG lol this is carrying over to Iran. We already had the inside out look on this with Bush. Now we are watching the outside in perspective with Amadinejad.

[The2ndWheel]

20. Sounds a little sad in a way

For the sake of arguing with myself, I'll keep it simple.

First we're a government of, by, and for the people. Then a people of, by, and for the government. Now it's a government of, by, and for twitter, which has to be delivered to us.

[madeline_con]

23. You seem to be suggesting the Iranians would never have htought of

these protests on their own, as thought we, in our less than 3 centuries old wisdom, invented the idea of dissent. That's the rhetoric of the old turbaned mullahs who are whining about U.S. "interference."

Or. I may have misunderstood the implications in your post. :shrug:

[Wizard777]

27. Yes you are. It's merely a tool to better organize and empower dissent.

Man was capable of killing long before the gun came along. The gun was merely a tool/weapon that improved upon mans ability to kill. Just as the internet is a tool/weapon that has improved upon mans ability to dissent.

The internet and twitter are closing the informational gaps governments used to exploit.

[rocktivity]

18. Because the corporate media got scooped like ice cream on the Iran revolution, of course.

This is Trent Lott's resignation and Gannongate all over again--they're being forced to pick up a story from the "little people" in the "undergrond" that grew too large for them to continue to ignore.

There's actually a twitter thread called #cnnfail.

:headbang:
rocktivity

[sufrommich]

24. The real story behind Twitter and the Iranian revolution is

that, at least in technologically advanced societies, it will be impossible to control the information coming out of the country. The whole world is literally watching. The real question is ,why do so many people have a problem with that?

[wildeyed]

28. It is easier than talking about the more complex aspects of the story.

The Twitter part is a good hook to pull people in. That said, I have been watching the protests on Facebook and Twitter since Saturday morning and it is one of the most compelling news experiences of my life. I got to see the start of the protests before any MSM was reporting it, even before there was much talk on the blogs. No filter at all, just raw footage and posts from people actually participating. It was really, really cool. So I do think the social networking part of the story is valid. It is so new that it will take a while to figure out what it really means.

[ThomWV]

35. And infinitly cheaper than hiring someone who can talk about complex aspects of the story.

It costs them nothing. If you are selling news, or anything else, its much more profitable if you don't have to pay for the raw material. No pesky Reporters to have to pay, no travel costs, no bothersom and expensive communications links, no crews. Just plain cheaper to do. Who gives a fuck about the results, the idiots that watch the shows wouldn't know news if it kneecapped them.

[ColbertWatcher]

31. It beats reporting? It makes them seem "hip"? n/t

[Echo In Light]

34. Help cement the idea that the Powers That Be are interested in "interacting" with us

You know, because they so give a shit about what we think.