MRC Newbusters, December 3, 2024: NBC Hails a Shift: ‘Journalists Flock to Bluesky as X Becomes Increasingly ‘Toxic’
Kat Tenbarge, tech and culture reporter for NBC News, filed an online story Saturday, “Journalists flock to Bluesky as X becomes increasingly ‘toxic’ — Journalists are finding more readers and less hate on Bluesky than on the platform they used to know as Twitter.”
As long as you follow the liberal line, that is.
Tenbarge opened with a journalist and Bluesky fan:
When Ashton Pittman, an award-winning news editor and reporter, first joined the app Bluesky, he said, he was the only Mississippi journalist he knew to be using it. Until about five weeks ago, he said, that was the case. But now, Pittman said, there are at least 15 Mississippi journalists on Bluesky as it becomes a preferred platform for reporters, writers, activists and other groups who have become increasingly alienated by X.
The report from NBC, as covered by NewsBusters, where Kat Tenbarge suggests that journalists are flocking to Bluesky due to the toxicity of X (formerly Twitter), can be critically examined through the lens of the “Anecdotal Fallacy.” Here’s a well-reasoned and logical case challenging these claims:
Anecdotal Evidence Over Statistical Data:
Tenbarge’s argument appears to hinge on anecdotal evidence, focusing on individual or small group experiences rather than comprehensive data. The claim that journalists are finding “more readers and less hate” on Bluesky lacks quantitative evidence to substantiate a broad trend across the journalism community. Without metrics like user engagement, readership statistics from Bluesky, or comparative hate speech analysis between platforms, her assertions remain anecdotal.
Sample Size and Representativeness:
The article does not specify how many journalists are moving to Bluesky, nor does it provide a demographic or professional breakdown of these journalists. Are these high-profile journalists, those with niche followings, or journalists from specific sectors? Without this information, the claim might only represent a very small, non-representative sample of the journalistic community, which is vast and diverse.
Misrepresentation of Journalists’ Distribution Methods:
The premise that journalists rely heavily on social media for distribution is itself flawed. Real journalists, particularly those associated with traditional media outlets, utilize a variety of distribution channels beyond social media:
Print and Digital Media: Many news stories are first published in newspapers, magazines, or on news websites, which have their own established readership.
Broadcast: Television and radio still play significant roles in news dissemination.
Syndication: News agencies and syndication services distribute content to a wide array of outlets.
Direct Subscriptions: Newsletters, subscriptions to exclusive content, and paywalls are increasingly common for direct reader engagement.
Social media platforms like X or Bluesky are tools for additional reach but not the primary means of distribution for most journalists. This suggests that even if there were a shift to Bluesky among some journalists, it might not reflect a significant change in how news is fundamentally disseminated.
Confirmation Bias and Selective Reporting:
Tenbarge might be focusing on journalists who have had negative experiences on X or those who are vocal about moving to Bluesky, potentially ignoring or not mentioning those who remain on X or have found success there. This selective reporting can skew the narrative towards a particular outcome, fitting the anecdotal fallacy by only highlighting cases that confirm the hypothesis.
Lack of Longitudinal Analysis:
The article does not address the longevity of this supposed trend. Is this migration to Bluesky a temporary reaction to current events on X, or is it indicative of a lasting shift in platform preference? Without long-term data, the claim could be an overstatement of a transient phenomenon.
Conclusion:
While Kat Tenbarge’s report might capture a sentiment among some journalists regarding the environment on X, it falls into the trap of the anecdotal fallacy by not providing a broad, data-driven analysis to back up the claim of a significant shift to Bluesky. Journalists, by nature of their profession, engage with a diverse array of distribution methods, and social media, while influential, is just one part of a much larger ecosystem. A more robust argument would require empirical evidence showing changes in distribution patterns, audience engagement across platforms, and a broader consensus among the journalistic community. Without this, the narrative seems more like a narrative of selective anecdotes rather than an objective analysis of journalistic trends.