Does Mashable have credibility re Twitter?

Sunday, April 12, 2009 by Dave Winer.

This article by Pete Cashmore at Mashable is now the top item on TechMeme. 

Cashmore is one of very small number of users who Twitter includes in their Suggested Users List, which has resulted in huge growth in their number of followers.  

Three months ago, he had 28,621 followers. Today he has 417,347. In the same timeframe my Twitter feed grew from 16,062 to 21,108, which represents something of a baseline for users not gifted by Twitter with placement on the SUL. (Source: twittercounter.com.) 

Did Twitter favor him with this gift because they like what he says about them, or to encourage him to be more favorable in his writing? Or some other reason? Did he pay for this placement? (Note that would, imho, be the ethical thing to do, and the same deal should be offered to everyone.) 

Would Cashmore withhold or temper criticism of Twitter because he fears they may cut him off? 

Would a reader question his impartiality? (This reader does. I can't see how he can help but be influenced.) 

Does this kind of favoritism hurt Twitter as a medium for journalism? 

Another question will likely come up at some point -- Will Cashmore have to pay taxes on this gift? It could turn into a pretty big liability, even in a non-ethical sense. 

I wrote about this previously on March 12.