News

The alert was already sent directly to everyone's phone. The issue is that it directed people to Twitter for updates, when it could have just as easily pointed to a national weather service site.

If they were to use Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram for alerts, they’d hit 90% of the population.

Twitter used to be very reliable, that is no longer the case.

In this case they blocked access and that is the problem. Twitter decided, with no warning, to block all access without an account and logging in.

There is no guarantee this or worse will not happen again.

This broke the system in place. That is my point. Social media in private hands cannot be relied on to provide a time critical alerts like this.

The governments around the world screwed up by seeding this system to a private company that can be trusted to maintain a service. But they did it for the usual reason, it was cheap to implement.

Not trying to be argumentative or anything, but is there something else (that currently exists) they can use that would get as many eyeballs on the alert?

What advantage does social media have over a basic website, other than the ability to spread through engagement? In a situation like this, I see no practical reason why they're not directing people to a government site along with social media.

I think the answer is just basic laziness, because it's easier to have some intern send a tweet than update a website, so we're offloading necessary functions to mercurial and unreliable capitalists. And that always ends well.....