132
Why do new sites embed tweets? (lemmy.world)
submitted 11 months ago by gedaliyah@lemmy.world to c/nostupidquestions@lemmy.world
26 comments fedilink hide all child comments

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?

top 26 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca 57 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

It's been common practice for well over decade now...

Embedded content lets you click on it to follow the tweet chain and see more info or even contribute to the conversation. A screenshot only shows exactly what the author decides to show you and nothing more.

Content disappearing or twitter walling itself off hasn't been an issue until twatwaffle took over.

[-] berkeleyblue@lemmy.world 20 points 11 months ago

I mean to be fair you could just show the Screenshot and then link the image to the tweet (or whatever it is called now…). Best of both worlds (but more work)

[-] otter@lemmy.ca 20 points 11 months ago

Sounds like we need a single click "archive.org + embed" solution.

It would also freeze the content as is

[-] Nawor3565@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 11 months ago

Exactly. Also, screenshots can easily be doctored. An embedded tweet could not be, since you could easily click the link to see the original tweet.

[-] AbouBenAdhem@lemmy.world 26 points 11 months ago

So a screen shot linking to the original tweet, then?

[-] scytale@lemm.ee 10 points 11 months ago

Or they can do both. Post a screenshot and link the tweet below it so users have the option to click to the source. I don’t explicitly block twitter but it’s so bad that more often than not the embedded tweet doesn’t display when viewing the page with uBO.

[-] Jajcus@kbin.social 5 points 11 months ago

'doctoring' can go both ways. Embedding gives more 'doctoring power' to original poster and X.

[-] jeena@jemmy.jeena.net 48 points 11 months ago

As far as I remember it's part of Xitters Terms and Conditions that if you want to show a tweet you need to embed it, otherwise you're stealing it.

And for Xitter it's great, they still can change or delete it, they run javascript on the news page to get all your information, etc.

[-] drmoose@lemmy.world 19 points 11 months ago

Lol what are they going to do if I break ToS ban me from Twitter?

[-] jeena@jemmy.jeena.net 26 points 11 months ago

They don't care about you but yes they would probably go after a newspaper and sue them for copyright infringement.

[-] Steve@communick.news 11 points 11 months ago

That suit would be practically impossible, as it's clearly Fair Use.

[-] centof@lemm.ee 7 points 11 months ago

Fair use is a defense you have to make in court. And court is expensive.

[-] AnyOldName3@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

Fair use only covers critique, parody and education, and only with a whole bunch of extra nuance (e.g. you can't just put a clip of yourself saying you didn't like a movie at the end of the movie and get away with hosting it on your site by claiming it was critique, and you can't download a PDF of a textbook and get away with it by claiming it was for education). Fair use lets you do a lot less than people think.

[-] CluckN@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

I hate Twitter but I despise articles that just post 3 tweets and provides a barebones AI recap of the conversation.

[-] drmoose@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

Can you imagine a precedent it would set. Twitter would never win.

[-] Tvkan@feddit.de 8 points 11 months ago

If you're a large online news outlet doing this repeatedly: Probably sue you.

[-] RightHandOfIkaros@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

Wait, comments on Twitter are NFTs now?

[-] TonyTonyChopper@mander.xyz 11 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Embeds update to reflect your typeface setting, scaling for larger or smaller screens, are compatible with screen readers... and you are giving immediate access to the original source. Screenshots are completely static and could be easily faked etc. Having archived copies of things is good of course but there's no real reason to do it for the display version in a webpage

[-] blargerer@kbin.social 12 points 11 months ago

Although this provides the best experience (very broadly speaking) for new users. It only takes looking at websites from 20 years ago to realize that it ages very poorly and no one maintains the links/external media once they break.

[-] gedaliyah@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

This seems like the most reasonable (and ethical) reason for the decision. Someone else mentioned ToS, which might be a stronger (but not necessarily ethical) reason. I would think that if it is not a result of the Terms, problems with embedding strongly outweigh the benefits. If it's just about the Terms, I'd think a good journalist should quote the text in the article (same as reporting on any public statement), then hyperlink the site.

That would fully be compatible with device and accessibility settings, and provide the same verification as the embedded X. It would be better for journalism because editing could happen from the X side in the future, including removal, which is already possible. It would be better for privacy, web integrity, etc.

It's probably easier to do too.

[-] magnetosphere@kbin.social -1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Those are indeed good reasons, but there’s so much other content that doesn’t scale, like charts, graphs, and maps. If I was running a large media company, I’d rather use high-resolution screenshots than let the Muskrat alter the content of my stories.

Let him sue. I’d rather go to court than let that jackass undermine journalistic integrity.

[-] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 10 points 11 months ago

Journalists citing twitter are lazy idiots. LAZY. Twitter has done journalism no favors despite the conventional wisdom.

this post was submitted on 14 Dec 2023
132 points (90.7% liked)

No Stupid Questions

35868 readers
900 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)

Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.

Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.

Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.

Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.

Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.

Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.

Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.

Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.

Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.

Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.

Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
ja2@lemmy.world
_MoveSwiftly@lemmy.world
Rooki@lemmy.world
Thekingoflorda@lemmy.world
automodbeta@lemmy.world
L3s@lemmy.world