Is that really true though? They've been a huge beneficiary of fake news, astroturfing and bots. They've only relatively recently started to do something resembling policing of these things.
Twitter is where you're meaningfully in control of who you follow and what you see. That means it's on you to curate that, and many won't want to do that. I was on Twitter for a while before I found the real niche and strategies that made it my favorite place. Once I got it, the curation became an activity that I enjoy, part of the loop, and it's rewarding when it's working well. If you're seeing fake news regularly it's because you want to see it.
One key thing to do is avoid the algorithmic timeline, Twitter does force bullshit down your throat to maximize engagement metrics, but where is that not the norm anymore? My Twitter experience might crumble if I lose access to the app that removes ads and suggested content from the timeline and keeps it fully chronological.
What Twitter does bring is the ability for one to say "this is a person I know or am familiar with; I can now trust what they say" - which Reddit eschews in favor of simple popularity. But since the "Hot" algorithm weights based on time-scaled popularity within each community, it's not quite as bad as one might think.
Any place is. The person you're replying to is convinced that Twitter is "the best" but any network where you invest can be really good.
On facebook, I've gotten rid of people I don't like and now it's only people I admire + interesting articles. My reddit front page is great for me - programming subreddits interpolated with cute animal gifs. I use Instagram maybe twice a year but I'm sure if I invested into finding people I admired, it'd be worthwhile too. Ditto with HN - most comments are self assured pronouncements made with absolute confidence and minimal expertise. But once you start to recognise certain usernames, you're able to sift the wheat from the chaff easily.
Twitter isn't "the best". Nor are any of the others. Each has it's niche.
This seems to be one of the last avenues FB has left for retaining younger users, who've rejected the friends & family part of it. Even FB knows this type of usage is their future as their Super Bowl ads concentrated on finding like-minded groups.
I feel the same with Twitter. Although it has very high quality content and more interesting people, I think the baseline is lower than on reddit. Reddit is topic instead of celebrity oriented which is far more enjoyable for me. But true, I wouldn't like to put in effort to curate anything.
Twitter is optimized for fake identities, and for virally spreading the most sensationalistic content.
Sure, mine are simply uninteresting and that's why Facebook isn't a viable place to get content.
> Twitter is optimized for fake identities, and for virally spreading the most sensationalistic content.
This is the common sentiment about Twitter spread by outsiders, but I don't understand it. As I said, it only has to be your Twitter experience if you situate yourself in those conditions. The difference with Twitter is that it's the best place to avoid that experience if you choose to put in effort. And if you don't put in effort, your experience anywhere is going to be chosen for you, and bad.
If I wanted to get on Twitter and complain about Hillary or Trump all day then sure, I'm either going to be preaching to a bubble or fighting with trolls. But that's just one way to use Twitter, not the one I'm interested in, and I don't understand why it's become synonymous with the Twitter experience.
I'm settling on a conclusion that some folks care more about what those close to them "in life" share, and others are more interested in what "outsiders" share. Those outsiders may be renowned global experts in their field, or athletes, or vapid influencers, or anything in between.
Regardless, I haven't been able to make it work.
On Reddit you can follow a community but then you’re bound by the quality of the community and it’s moderation. If on Twitter I want to follow an author I follow them. I engage with them. No additional noise or BS.
I'm unconvinced that this is even a good thing. It's really hard to police that without seeming biased. Take this new story about labeling a clip of Biden as "edited". Biden said those words, but the clip was cut short. This is essentially a sound bite without context. It makes Twitter look like they're defending Biden, but I doubt that this was Twitter's intent. I think that trying to police these things now will simply dig themselves deeper into a hole.