"Yet if journalism is the first draft of history, even lifestyle journalism such as feminism quizzes, it is wrong to deny that an editor thought it was a good idea to publish something, even if they later change their mind. Removing articles not only shows a lack of support for contributors, but allows readers, even casual readers who come across an article by chance or tweet, to rewrite that history, and adds to the dangerous idea that editors are becoming surplus to requirements.
While we may take on board readers' views for future issues, we must be prepared to stand by and explain our editorial decisions in the light of comment, with removal of content a last resort."
Editor of the Guardian, Alan Rusbridger, holds open meeting for staff to discuss what political position the paper should adopt in its election editorial.
For the first time, the Guardian also decided to hear not only from its staff, but from its readers and web users, too.
Article also includes great overview of which party the main British papers have supported since 1945.
Congress to archive every tweet ever posted publicly – BBC News
Twitter's general counsel, Alex MacGillivray:
""This project however is not about us, it is about our users and the fact they use the service to chronicle these amazing events. President Obama actually tweeted after he was elected. That is a big deal and it's something he did.
"It is not something we imagined when we were forming the service," Mr MacGillivray told BBC News."
"As a historian you will be able to look back at that and understand what people felt. The same with the healthcare legislation that recently passed. You can look back and say what where people talking about and have those views changed over time? We think that will be really useful.""
This will be a fantastic resource for journalism and communication scholars.