[Neff]

c) I don't.

The service had a value to me when there was a focus on interaction, but as it transitioned to a news feed/advertisement service it lost any and all use to me.

For news, there are enough sites that all spout off the same reviews and "exclusives". If there is truly breaking news that I need to be made aware of, there are a multitude of channels I can get the information from and all of them will convey the information better than a 140 character tweet could.

[bbayer]

I have Twitter installed on my phone but I check the tweets once a week.I realized I don't really care what people are doing, what they are eating now, what they are watching on TV. Flipboard or similar service is always enough for me to gather important information from rest of the world.

[jfb]

Yeah, me neither. The signal-to-noise ratio is just way too low, and I don't need another medium to monitor.

[pearjuice]

d) Never used Twitter

As soon as I realized that sometimes there is news worthy stuff posted there, there will always be reporters crawling through the noise to find those and put the content on their respective outlets. What's the point of me subscribing to boat loads of literal shit ("at toilet, pls rt") to find a pearl now and then, when I can use traditional media to get to the pearls immediately? Sure, I might not get the pearls instantly, but I think that sacrifice is totally worth it when I occasionally read through some public Twitter feed.

[Neff]

The larger issue is that Twitter has pushed news services to focus on being first over being correct. It seems like reporters are falling over themselves to be the first to break a story, journalistic integrity be damned.