|
Top-level
@atomicpoet @ianbetteridge @DarkWraithLord I do not understand the Twitter Journalist. If the object is to get your work read, you establish yourself on all the platforms. You expand your reach. I don't understand 1/20th of whys of the fediverse, but I did this: it will get your work to a larger audience than if you post exclusively on Twitter. 6 comments
 @stpaultim @Hey_Beth @atomicpoet @DarkWraithLord I'm not entirely sure that's true. I've found Mastodon very welcoming, generally (I've blocked a few asshats). But you have to engage with people, and not just switch into broadcast mode all the time.  @ianbetteridge @stpaultim @Hey_Beth @DarkWraithLord There's lots of journalists on the Fediverse, but not all of them are cut out for it. In fact, there are dedicated journalist instances (ex: journa.host). However, some journalists don't exactly engage with the community in good faith -- and people know. @atomicpoet @stpaultim @Hey_Beth @DarkWraithLord I think a lot of it comes down to whether you are prepared to listen or not. If you listen – even if you end up disagreeing – I think it works. Mind you, that's true of life in general too :) @Hey_Beth @atomicpoet @DarkWraithLord Yes - Twitter provides a vanishingly small fraction of traffic and reach compared to Facebook. But journalists are often highly social and they flock to platforms where other journalists are. Twitter is that platform. It's not about the audience, it's about where your mates and sources are.  @Hey_Beth @atomicpoet @ianbetteridge @DarkWraithLord The real value of Twitter to journalists was realtime sources, not exposure. But the ones who got Twitter-famous from their interactions there but who aren't moving here are riding reputations while the sources dry up... |
Gregory's Server
@Hey_Beth @atomicpoet @ianbetteridge @DarkWraithLord
At least some journalists were sent back to Twitter by those in the community with a narrow vision of what Mastodon can and should be.
Mastodon has not been entirely welcoming to Journalists.