Analysis suggests links in tweets hurt news publishers' engagement on X

The finding, in brief

It has been reported that links in tweets appear to sap engagement for big news publishers on X (formerly Twitter). The claim reignited after Nate Silver’s critique that X has become “next to useless” for following breaking news because the algorithm allegedly penalizes posts that include links. A new Nieman Lab analysis — scraping the 200 most-recent tweets from 18 large publishers with help from Claude — makes the pattern hard to ignore: link-first tweets cluster with low likes, replies, and retweets.

How the study was done and what it showed

The sample included six paywalled outlets (Bloomberg, CNN, Forbes, The New York Times, WSJ, Washington Post), nine non-paywalled publishers (AP, BBC, Reuters, Fox, etc.), and three breaking-news aggregator accounts that rarely link. It has been reported that the charts show traditional, link-loving publishers bunched in a dense, low-engagement corner, while accounts that surface breaking news without links often get far more engagement. The visual was reportedly so stark that a combined chart became almost unreadable — a mass of low-engagement bubbles.

Why this matters — and the awkward truth for publishers

Big outlets still boast millions of followers, but many are getting only a trickle of interaction on X. That’s the emotional gut-punch: huge reach on paper, tiny echoes in practice. Publishers face a split incentive — drive subscriptions by sending readers to proprietary sites, or chase platform engagement by changing post styles. Will they adapt, or keep treating X as a link farm? The answer will shape where news "starts" and how much of it anyone actually notices.

Sources: niemanlab.org