Blog after blog regurgitated the same story, "Google Inc. is reportedly weighing the acquisition of Internet TV service Brightcove Inc. for between $500 million and $700 million..." and they all used only one Tweet to run with the story.
Just after 9:00 am pacific time mediatwit the following Tweet:
Glaser noted later that he never said Google was buying Brightcove and that a source told him they were in buyout discussions and that it was not a done deal. He said not one person contacted him to check it and they "all just ran with the one tweet".
"I think this is a great example of where Twitter is dangerous. If this kind of news first came out on a blog, people would expect some analysis of the story, would expect to read the authors take on what it means and the blog would give the author enough room to give their take on the news. But with Twitter, how much can someone really explain something in 140 characters? As Mark pointed out in a follow-up Tweet, he never said Google "acquired" Brightcove, he said his source told him they were in discussions. Something that probably would have come across a lot stronger if it was a blog post, as opposed to a one sentence comment on Twitter."