Twitter's "problem," and I'm using quotes because it's still hugely successful and holds an importance to the modern web even if it's not what was originally intended, is the noise to value of the platform for the overwhelming majority of it's users when compared against other platforms. Because of it's growth it's become a place for brands, celebrities, and journalists to talk to, not at, their readers. There's no meaningful sense of engagement or community, and if you are not checking constantly you will miss most of what goes through your twitter feed. Compare to Facebook, which because it was built on the idea of networking with your friends and family first, has better engagement tools (you can converse on a friends topic far better than RT and favoriting). You have a stronger connection with what shows up in your feed (especially when you block people and apps), and it's easier not to miss stuff.
I can say as a small business owner that Facebook has a much higher engagement with my customers than Twitter, things I talk about above are why I believe this is the case.
Tech reporters will largely miss this point because of the tech bubble they're absorbed in. The same people who can't fathom why Google Now might not hold much value to a person who works a 9-5 job Monday through Friday with the same commute, and doesn't fly all that often. Really Google, it will take me 20 minutes to get to work today? Wow, that's just like everyday! Sorry for that tangent. Their far larger than average followers puts them out of the average twitter user and into one of the small minority of users that get to have a soapbox they can use to talk to their audience, and more importantly, can talk back to other members of their exclusive club. In their echo chamber they have value in the service, and as they so often do, find themselves seeking answers from within their own experiences rather than those of the common user.