The only way to measure accuracy is in hindsight, so based on the examples I've given and others, Twitter does a good job. This isn't a good way to measure, since no one tracks false reports on Twitter, or at least, they're quickly forgotten.

I'm not advocating either medium as better.

How does one measure the accuracy of twitter vs. the mainstream media? What is the unit of measure you'd use for that? Just wondering… (and again, I am not a big fan of the accuracy/quality of many mainstream media outlets).

Beyond the factual nature of the tweets, and yes, they are frequently factual (see examples), the emotional nature of being caught up in the news is bound to come across in tweets.

“more accurately” my big hairy tuchus.

I really doubt the accuracy of the Iranian election riots tweets, too. The gummint repressiveness almost guarantees the repressed feel they need to exaggerate. Not necessarily the original tweeters, but those who pass it along. And of course, some of the original tweeters are going to be speaking through emotional filters, and some will rationalize that gummint actions allow or require exaggeration. ” We know it is worse than we see“.

I worked with a lot of Persian programmers who fled persecution after 1979. The ladies were especially happy to be out of there.

I didn't realize TMZ changed their initial assertion from dead to coma. Maybe they doubted their source, surprise

Crowds can be wrong, but they can be useful to get our attention.