Twitter Files (English Wikipedia)

Analysis of information sources in references of the Wikipedia article "Twitter Files" in English language version.

refsWebsite
Global rank English rank
1st place
1st place
28th place
26th place
14th place
14th place
34th place
27th place
5th place
5th place
low place
9,171st place
476th place
282nd place
140th place
115th place
54th place
48th place
79th place
65th place
7th place
7th place
1,716th place
973rd place
114th place
90th place
228th place
158th place
2,186th place
1,287th place
268th place
215th place
low place
low place
92nd place
72nd place
193rd place
152nd place
108th place
80th place
107th place
81st place
30th place
24th place
1,698th place
987th place
38th place
40th place
208th place
156th place
49th place
47th place
561st place
392nd place
8th place
10th place
2,008th place
1,197th place
low place
low place
5,670th place
3,086th place
330th place
222nd place
137th place
101st place
41st place
34th place
701st place
439th place
388th place
265th place
312th place
197th place
146th place
110th place
129th place
89th place
474th place
329th place
12th place
11th place
254th place
236th place
low place
7,646th place
259th place
188th place
584th place
378th place
4,062nd place
2,178th place
1,332nd place
708th place
low place
low place
low place
low place
low place
low place
3,498th place
1,889th place
2,728th place
1,571st place
269th place
201st place
220th place
155th place
99th place
77th place
433rd place
284th place
36th place
33rd place
466th place
349th place
346th place
229th place
175th place
137th place
9th place
13th place
2,057th place
1,118th place

aljazeera.com (Global: 268th place; English: 215th place)

apnews.com (Global: 129th place; English: 89th place)

archive.today (Global: 14th place; English: 14th place)

arstechnica.com (Global: 388th place; English: 265th place)

axios.com (Global: 1,716th place; English: 973rd place)

bbc.co.uk (Global: 8th place; English: 10th place)

bloomberg.com (Global: 99th place; English: 77th place)

bloomberglaw.com (Global: 5,670th place; English: 3,086th place)

news.bloomberglaw.com

businessinsider.com (Global: 140th place; English: 115th place)

businesstoday.in (Global: 1,332nd place; English: 708th place)

cbsnews.com (Global: 108th place; English: 80th place)

cnbc.com (Global: 220th place; English: 155th place)

cnbctv18.com (Global: 4,062nd place; English: 2,178th place)

cnn.com (Global: 28th place; English: 26th place)

cnn.com

edition.cnn.com

economist.com (Global: 254th place; English: 236th place)

  • "According to Twitter, Twitter's algorithm favours conservatives". The Economist. November 13, 2021. Archived from the original on January 22, 2023. Retrieved December 14, 2022. Among the most hotly debated questions on social media is how algorithmic bias affects social media. In America conservatives claim that Facebook and Twitter bury or outright censor their views. The left retorts that right-wing conspiracy theories like QAnon flourish on these sites. An unlikely arbiter recently emerged in this debate: Twitter itself. In October it released a paper it said demonstrated that its algorithm, which picks which tweets users see in which order, favoured right-leaning American news sites. In six of the seven countries studied, the algorithm also gave a disproportionate boost to lawmakers from conservative political parties.

engadget.com (Global: 466th place; English: 349th place)

forbes.com (Global: 54th place; English: 48th place)

fortune.com (Global: 433rd place; English: 284th place)

gizmodo.com (Global: 474th place; English: 329th place)

gmfus.org (Global: low place; English: low place)

securingdemocracy.gmfus.org

independent.co.uk (Global: 36th place; English: 33rd place)

insider.com (Global: 584th place; English: 378th place)

kslnewsradio.com (Global: low place; English: low place)

mashable.com (Global: 561st place; English: 392nd place)

mercurynews.com (Global: 701st place; English: 439th place)

motherjones.com (Global: 2,008th place; English: 1,197th place)

nationalreview.com (Global: 1,698th place; English: 987th place)

nbcnews.com (Global: 137th place; English: 101st place)

newsnationnow.com (Global: low place; English: 9,171st place)

newsweek.com (Global: 269th place; English: 201st place)

newyorker.com (Global: 146th place; English: 110th place)

npr.org (Global: 92nd place; English: 72nd place)

nymag.com (Global: 346th place; English: 229th place)

nypost.com (Global: 208th place; English: 156th place)

  • Bovard, James (June 8, 2023). "Washington throws a pity party for federal censors finally being investigated". Retrieved July 30, 2025.

nytimes.com (Global: 7th place; English: 7th place)

politico.com (Global: 312th place; English: 197th place)

reason.com (Global: 2,186th place; English: 1,287th place)

reuters.com (Global: 49th place; English: 47th place)

rollcall.com (Global: 3,498th place; English: 1,889th place)

sfist.com (Global: low place; English: 7,646th place)

slate.com (Global: 259th place; English: 188th place)

spokesman.com (Global: 2,057th place; English: 1,118th place)

telegraph.co.uk (Global: 30th place; English: 24th place)

theatlantic.com (Global: 228th place; English: 158th place)

  • Warzel, Charlie (December 9, 2022). "Elon Musk's Twitter Files Are Bait". The Atlantic. Archived from the original on December 11, 2022. Retrieved December 16, 2022.
  • French, David (December 3, 2022). "Elon Musk and Tucker Carlson Don't Understand the First Amendment". The Atlantic. Archived from the original on January 22, 2023. Retrieved December 7, 2022. Last night, on Fox News, Tucker Carlson also picked up the claim about the First Amendment. With characteristic breathless hyperbole, Carlson declared that the documents "show a systemic violation of the First Amendment, the largest example of that in modern history." Musk and Carlson are both profoundly wrong; the documents released so far show no such thing. In October 2020, when the laptop story broke, Joe Biden was not president. The Democratic National Committee (which also asked for Twitter to review tweets) is not an arm of the government. It's a private political party. Twitter is not an arm of the government; it is a private company.
  • DiResta, RenĂ©e (June 15, 2024). "My Encounter With the Fantasy-Industrial Complex". The Atlantic. Retrieved June 23, 2024.

thedailybeast.com (Global: 330th place; English: 222nd place)

theguardian.com (Global: 12th place; English: 11th place)

thehill.com (Global: 476th place; English: 282nd place)

thetimes.com (Global: low place; English: low place)

theverge.com (Global: 114th place; English: 90th place)

twitterfiles.co (Global: low place; English: low place)

usatoday.com (Global: 41st place; English: 34th place)

vanityfair.com (Global: 107th place; English: 81st place)

vice.com (Global: 175th place; English: 137th place)

washingtonexaminer.com (Global: 2,728th place; English: 1,571st place)

washingtonpost.com (Global: 34th place; English: 27th place)

web.archive.org (Global: 1st place; English: 1st place)

wired.com (Global: 193rd place; English: 152nd place)

worldcat.org (Global: 5th place; English: 5th place)

search.worldcat.org

wpde.com (Global: low place; English: low place)

wsj.com (Global: 79th place; English: 65th place)

yahoo.com (Global: 38th place; English: 40th place)

ca.finance.yahoo.com

news.yahoo.com

youtube.com (Global: 9th place; English: 13th place)