Twitter is on fire, social networks are on fire, whoever or whatever is stirring up the Internet. I declare open war on these tontolares and all their variants.
They usually have behind them an opinion column signed by the loudmouth of the day, who makes a living out of it (and no longer knows what to come up with), the shrimp of the usual public figure, the new wannabe attention junkie or the fachiboba cover of the day.
And the fact is that "Twitter is on fire" is already a catchphrase worthy of being added with honours to the list of invitations to quick indignation for the click of the day. Because they don't tend to last much longer, the run of this type of "news" is usually as short-lived as any other issue, however important it may seem. Because another topic comes in fast and has to be greeted with massive honours.
who is going to resist joining the fire when it's a big fire and it's happening right now? It's textbook sensationalism, it's screaming scandal! but just take a look at Tonter's #juastag and you'll find Lady Gargle or Justino Brevas as the "fire" of the day along with other bullshit, whether it's about a radio or TV show or any other jokes to pass the time.
how many years must it take for the news to stop being where people give their opinion on something?
It doesn't matter who, or how many, or what they say, or in what context. It will always be a fire in which everyone moves around like a huge shoal of piranhas looking for the colorao. Thus, all the media have a batamanta editor sitting in front of the TV, with his "Twitter is burning" template in draft form, waiting for the keyboard to fire so as not to lose traffic from the different sources of the fires.
And while the hordes are moving between fires, the pundits continue to sing the praises of social media as the revolutionary new medium that, for the moment, is nothing more than a sausage-like repeater of the noise generated by the usual media.
