And lots of untrustworthy people post on xitter.
There is no editorial control or need for it.
In fact, the incentives are to post outrageous and incorrect things for higher engagement.
No one should be using anything posted on xitter (in particular) uncritically.
Really any social media, but xitter is notoriously bad.
I disagree.
The MSM, and even public media like CBC and BBC, miss way too many very solid and trustworthy sources. Sources like Amnesty, HRW, B'tselem, Unicef, MSF, WFP, ICJ and ICC and other human rights organizations around the world do not get media attention. Unless you're going directly to those sources there is way too much news that just doesn't show up on MSM. Same with trump and discussions about the legal and moral repercussions of his EO's. Sure there is a ton shit there but unfortunately, its also still a source for direct local reporting and eyewitness accounts along with other legit sources that you wouldn't hear from otherwise.
Social media is inherently untrustworthy.
Incorrect, there are lots of inherently untrustworthy shit on social media but there is also lots of very trustworthy reporting.
Your sources are usually unchecked twitter posts.
That is your view and its unsubstantiated. I post a lot of stuff from human rights and UN reports that aren't as easily accessible anywhere else. I also post direct, eyewitness accounts that some people claim is untrustworthy because it runs against their narrative. That's very much the case with you.
You, like many here, post a LOT of bullshit.
You, like many people here, post a lot of unsubstantiated comments.
I challenged you and your response was very much a skoob response, to just double down on the accusation with zero proof.