Well part of it is that a lot of #journalism may not have those resources after all.
With budgets being squeezed and internal debate over future directions of the organizations, there might not be resources–money and attention–available for them to do the work to embrace #fediverse.
Forking #Mastodon for #QTs
and such, adding it to institutional workflows isn’t a trivial thing as you make it out to be!
10 days ago I put down in writing my (low) expectations for Mastodon supporting QTs <https://sociale.network/@oblomov/110295026893193313>. With the recent growth of interest in #CalcKey, a platform that supports the feature, I'm already seeing my prediction come true, with high-profile accounts engaging in #UselessUseOfQT instead of plain old boosting or more in-depth out-of-band commentary. And that's still from a relatively small platform. When this his the larger Mastodon servers it'll be a shitshow.
Yes. #QTs are damaging to our inner posture when talking to others. Talking about the other, not to the other. #Thou becomes #It. #Dialogue becomes competition. I become the judge, not the partner.
On arriving here last November, I instantly felt the liberating power of Mastodon's discussion customs, especially the prohibition of QTs. I endlessly thought and posted about them. The recent announcement to introduce them saddens me; I absolutely share your fears.
#Mastodon introducing #QT#QTs on future release tells me this ship may not be heading into the iceberg that #Usenet and #IRC hit in their arrogance of not listening to their users. #Twitter#Bluesky
I feel like it's worth mentioning, re; quote-boosts/QTs, that we can't "just add the feature to Mastodon" in a federation - it's a lot more complicated than a lot of people seem to realise?
The argument about whether or not we should add QTs is an important one, but once we get past that there's the issue of federation.
Mastodon is one software of many using the ActivityPub "skeleton" code. If ActivityPub doesn't have QTs in its code and Mastodon adds a QT feature, any non-Mastodon software (or even server) has to work out how to interpret Mastodon's QTs. If it isn't Mastodon-compatible, QTs will just break. They might even break in a way that harms the person being QTed. And what if someone on another server boosts/reblogs that broken QT?
Also, since we on Mastodon can follow people who are using federated software that isn't Mastodon (e.g. instances/softwares that look and behave like Instagram, YouTube, Facebook, etc), how does that work? Would people on Mastodon be able to QT people on not-Mastodon? How are the OPs going to feel about that? Would they even get notifications about it, since QTs aren't in the ActivityPub "skeleton" of federation?
And since we're a federation of separate servers even "within" Mastodon, there's also the question of how older/outdated Mastodon servers will handle incoming QTs. If you're on an older version of Mastodon and you follow someone on a newer instance and they QT someone, what would that look like? Maybe someone has intentionally chosen a fork of Mastodon with QTs turned off. Can people on other softwares QT them, and how would they feel about that?