According to a recent Pew study, 15 percent of adults online use Twitter — 8 percent daily. I’ve yet to see a study confirming this, but I’m pretty sure most of that 8 percent are journalists. Journalists love Twitter, whether using it for writing, conversation—or fighting.
And I love to watch—and judge—the sparring. This is the first in what should be a regular feature as long as journalists snipe at each other on Twitter. If you see a #JournoTweetFight that you think merits inclusion, please give me a heads up @saramorrison.
I thought it would be best to begin with one of the bigger Twitter blow-ups this year. Mediabistro’s Jason Boog has a great Storify of the feud in full; I took a couple screenshots:
Author and former newspaper reporter Jennifer Weiner noticed something while reading her issue of The New York Times Magazine last weekend:

Goldman responded:

Salon’s Mary Elizabeth Williams made her feelings known:

And then she and Goldman had a bit of a back-and-forth:

New Yorker TV critic Emily Nussbaum also decided to weigh in:

And then it all devolved into accusations of Stalinism and trollingism until Weiner tweeted that Goldman had apologized (apparently, his wife was about as thrilled with his Twitter antics as Weiner, Williams, and Nussbaum were) and that Weiner appreciated and accepted that apology. Oh, and then Goldman’s Twitter account disappeared.
But it wasn’t over! NYT public editor Margaret Sullivan blogged about the Goldman article that spurred the Twitter debate, addressing his tweets and what the NYT’s role should be in monitoring the use of social media by its employees and freelancers (Goldman is a freelancer). “A clear social media policy may be in order,” she concluded. I hope not; these are really fun.
DECISION: The Female People, as represented by @jenniferweiner, @embeedub, @emilynussbaum, and @andrewrgoldman’s wife, are the clear winners of this round. Those of us who liked Goldman’s Twitter account are the losers, for it is no more.
I can't believe anyone would conduct a dialogue like this by Twitter. There's no way to communicate nuance, subtlety. Little wonder they had trouble understanding each other.
#1 Posted by DennisCMyers, CJR on Fri 12 Oct 2012 at 07:23 PM
WTF is this? A gossip column?
Protip: if journalists are spending their time watching twitter, they aren't being journalists.
Wake me up when cjr stops being encyclopedia dramatica.
Is this what's to expect from the reporters of the livejournal era?
#2 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Sat 13 Oct 2012 at 11:31 AM
Drama you want? Some that's more interesting:
http://gawker.com/5950981/unmasking-reddits-violentacrez-the-biggest-troll-on-the-web?post=53473431
http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/internet/2012/10/reddit-blocks-gawker-defence-its-right-be-really-really-creepy
Discuss?
#3 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Sun 14 Oct 2012 at 12:14 PM
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/amanda-todd-tragedy-highlights-how-social-media-makes-bullying-inescapable/article4611068/
http://m.thestar.com/news/canada/article/1271228--amanda-todd-bullied-girl-s-memorial-pages-targeted-by-negative-messages
Discuss?
#4 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Sun 14 Oct 2012 at 12:22 PM
The real problem with the Q+A was the exchange:
AG: There’s a photo of you and a teenage Melanie, whose head is six inches away from Neil, your first live-in lion.
TH: He was not a live-in lion. Sometimes I get so annoyed with you writers.
AG: The caption from your book reads, “Melanie and I with Neil, our first live-in lion.”
TH: O.K., I missed that one. O.K.
Why would you include that? He's making the interview about himself, not the subject. Unless she was seriously rude to him in some other way we didn't see, he should laugh that off.
#5 Posted by ACB, CJR on Mon 15 Oct 2012 at 02:11 PM