The next few tweets are about why and how mainstream media kill perfect stories because they are not new (1/..)

The first trick to get a perfect story killed is to tell the journalist it is not news at all. The accused organisation says that the scandal is already published on the web and gives the online source for that claim. (2/...)

This will make every reporter think twice. If it's already on the web, it's not news. And maybe a reason to find a different angle or even worse, end the production before publication. But here is the catch. The "old news" is not old news, but a statistical anomaly (3/..)

On the internet, we produce, give or take, 2.5 quintillion bytes of data EVERY day. There is a high probability that an obscure source already mentioned the scandal, by accident. I noticed that some big companies filter for those hidden gems to make journalists shut up. (4/..)

Corporate #osint specialists determine which obscure postings can convince reporters that the scandal is not news at all. Which I think is silly. The journalist's honor shouldn't be leading here, but the impact of the news (5/...)

In journalism, pride plays a role when you look at how a story is spread in the media. Sometimes a well-researched story, with impact, is not shared by competitors because they missed it and prefer to come with a new angle, or worse, try to downplay the missed news (6/.)

That ends my little rant - based on an upcoming interview in a Dutch magazine for reporters. (7/7)