ArticleScientific reports2024
The speed of news in Twitter (X) versus radio.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The rapid evolution of the Internet is reshaping the media landscape, with frequent claims of an accelerated and increasingly outraged news cycle. We test these claims empirically, investigating the dynamics of news spread, decay, and sentiment on Twitter (now known as X) compared to talk radio. Analyzing 2019-2021 data including 517,000 hour of radio content and 26.6 million tweets by elite journalists, politicians, and general users, we identified 1694 news events. We find that news on Twitter circulates faster, fades faster, and is more negative and outraged compared to radio, with Twitter outrage also more short-lived. These patterns are consistent across various user types and robustness checks. Our results illustrate an important way social media may influence traditional media: framing and agenda-setting simply by speaking first. As journalism evolves with these media, news audiences may encounter faster shifts in focus, less attention to each news event, and much more negativity and outrage.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.