A reader writes:

I totally agree with your reader; the way Twitter has connected the community and reported on events has been nothing short of amazing. Old media (Denver Post, Boulder Daily Camera) is linking to the Google Tweet maps to give the most up-to-date reporting on a fire that has burned over 7,000 acres and destroyed 53 reported homes so far. Evacuees have been using this to check on homes. Basically, it has been the go-to source rather than government officials or traditional journalists. And many citizens have gone out into the field themselves; check out this video report from someone who normally covers triathlons (...how Boulder). Stunning amateur photos here and here. The HuffPo covered the social media experience of the fire here.

The Twitter stats on #boulderfire are here. Laurasrecipes (the top tweeter) has been posting important info on where to donate, fire conditions, house status, etc. She writes a food blog. EpicColorado, a university-based research lab, has been the most consistent and solid reporter. Suzanbond has also done better reporting than many news sources. While they have provided important citizen journalism, new media source BoulderChannel1 has not and is getting roasted on Twitter for its shoddy reporting. (Search #boulderfire @boulderchannel1) This seems to me the type of narrative you like - a new media source falls short of good journalism and is subsequently policed by other users.

We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to letters@theatlantic.com.