I got asked this the other day and didn't have an answer. Having thought about it a bit have now decided there are several different ways of defining 'best' and that Twitter is in any case only one example of 'micro-blogging' that probably ought to be extended to things like Facebook 'status updates'.No one organisation is yet dominant in this area (though CNN is prominent) so here's my wholly unscientific take on leaders in the various categories:
Best for followers: CNN
More on CNN below but is the clear leader. In second place is NYT with its headlines-based account serving up headlines as a kind of alternative RSS via Twitter. Unexciting but tells you something important about making your content available the way users want it.
Best for effort -- New Austen Statesman
Look at this page and you can't help wondering if all Statesman editorial staff aren't on Twitter. Interestingly, most of these twitterstreams are genuine micro-blogs rather than alternative RSS feeds.
Best use in journalism -- CNN
Anchor Rick Sanchez discovered Twitter during Hurrican Gustav last August and has been using it to great effect for viewer responses ever since gathering more than 50,000 followers in the process.
Best for events - CNN
If you extend this to Facebook status updates then CNN's integration of FB for the Obama inauguration, the Oscars and the first major Obama speech were stunning in terms of numbers of contributions. Though there has got to be a question about how useful this kind of volume is.
Best for making money - glam.com
I can't find any news organisations with commercial plays on Twitter but glam.com does news (sort of) and found a way of sampling Twitter content around the Oscars that appealed to at least one advertiser.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=fe095842-a43f-4deb-ae91-bc45ffe3a43c)