[FillardMillmore]

I've noticed the Twitter embeds becoming more common in mainstream news sources in the last few years. I think I subconsciously attributed it to the fact that the US President uses Twitter as a major tool of communication, and many journalists followed suit (this attribution of causality could be entirely wrong as I'm not a Twitter user myself, just an occasional visitor to the site).

Despite this, if the embedded tweets do not contain primary evidence or quality secondary evidence, it would become more difficult for it to gain real traction in other news outlets, no?

[cyphar]

> Despite this, if the embedded tweets do not contain primary evidence or quality secondary evidence, it would become more difficult for it to gain real traction in other news outlets, no?

I'd suggest you read Manufacturing Consent.

[FillardMillmore]

Okay, I'm familiar with Chomsky, point taken, thanks!

[parineum]

> I think I subconsciously attributed it to the fact that the US President uses Twitter as a major tool of communication, and many journalists followed suit

I think you've got that backwards. Journalists quoting tweets to construct the desired narrative gave legitimacy to twitter.

Trump rode on those coat-tails. His birther campaign should have never gained mainstream traction but the media couldn't help themselves from reporting on a conspiracy theory because Trump is a salacious figure.

They Streisand effected his entire campaign and presidency.