Sadly for my 16-year-old daughter, she inherited her father's level of patience.

When she asks a question, she wants an answer — and she wants it now.

That led to an interesting text exchange between the two of us recently:

Scheduled tweets are indeed a thing, but somebody might want to inform the social media universe — including the news media.

While on an island and away from news of Sunday's mass shooting in Orlando, Fla., Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick caused a Twitterstorm with a tweet scheduled days earlier:

Here's how The Associated Press reported the news:

AUSTIN, Texas (AP) -- Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick has deleted a tweet quoting the New Testament that he posted after the deadly Orlando nightclub shooting.

Hours after the early Sunday morning shooting at a gay nightclub that left at least 50 people dead, Patrick sent a tweet from his personal account: "Do not be deceived. God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows."

The tweet received harsh criticism online and Texas' Democratic Party has called on the Republican Patrick to apologize.

Journalistic questions: Is it really fair to say that Patrick "posted" the tweet "after" the shooting? Is it accurate?

Not until the fourth paragraph does the AP get around to a Patrick spokesman's denial that the tweet had anything to do with Orlando and the explanation that the lieutenant governor regularly schedules Scripture tweets on Sunday morning (an easy thing for a journalist to check, by the way). Given that the tweet went out at exactly 7 a.m., it makes a whole lot of sense — if readers make it that far in the story.

Why not say "previously scheduled" tweet as soon as possible since evidence clearly supports that explanation? Wouldn't that be the responsible way to handle this news? Why give readers a wrong impression?

To their credit, some major newspapers — including the Dallas Morning News, the Houston Chronicle and the New York Times — got to the point much quicker than the AP. However, I'd argue that "previously scheduled" belongs in the very first sentence. Let readers know immediately what really happened.

It's also interesting that Patrick's lengthy discussion — posted on Facebook on Sunday afternoon — of the original verse and why he took it down drew little or no attention from outlets that reported on the tweet.

Certainly, Patrick's brand of right-wing Republicanism and conservative Christianity does not seem to make the news media his biggest fans. I get that. But when facts are twisted, it's the media's own credibility that suffers.