Why is the journalistic standard to embed tweets (xeets?) instead of using screenshots?

An embedded tweet can be deleted, and depends on X supporting the functionality. If editing is ever introduced on the platform, it would permanently break all past articles that don’t have an independent record of the tweet (such as a full quote in the article or a screenshot). X can potentially (and maybe does) embed tracking features.

It seems like there are a lot of good reasons not to use embedded tweets, but almost every news source does it this way. Is there a good reason why?

  • Nawor3565@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    Umm… No? That’s quite a conclusion to jump to when a quick Google search would show that no such thing exists.

    I swear, sometimes this community can be as bad as anti-vaxxers when it comes to pulling shit out of their ass and stating it as fact.

    • gregorum@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      i can only presume

      then maybe you should jump on google and look up what this means if you believe my statement was an assertion of fact.

    • Rolando@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      In general,

      If it’s only semantically plausible with reference to a given set of corpora, then it’s a hallucination.

      If it’s a hallucination that satisfies an emotional need, then it has truthiness.

      If it’s truthiness that is backed by a sufficiently powerful political force, then it is The Truth.

      Source: it was revealed to me in a dream.