> Actually, removing RSS streams is what makes twitter a business. They hold the keys to the data and can charge customers for access to the firehose.
Following on the analogy: to me they replaced a very good firehose (RSS) with a less efficient one.
> Your assumption is that the news consumption pattern ultimately dictates where the producers flock [...]
What ? No, my consumption pattern dictates where I (a user) go. And it turns out Twitter as a news media don't work for me (not twitter's fault though).
> In a model where individual users contribute, the key factor is which platform gives users an easy way to speak (and I would argue that twitter has done a decent job at reducing the tweet friction)
I don't see how removing the RSS feeds makes it less easy for a user to contribute. (shouldn't users who contribute be named producers in that context ?)