Comments on: Can Twitter save the world? http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate-uk/2009/10/24/can-twitter-save-the-world/ Wed, 16 Nov 2016 01:37:11 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: The Bell http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate-uk/2009/10/24/can-twitter-save-the-world/comment-page-1/#comment-7839 Sun, 25 Oct 2009 00:30:41 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate-uk/?p=3906#comment-7839 Social media is fine – perfectly fine, often. My work often involves social media deployment and I’m pleased to see developments – albeit generally ragged ones – emerge in this field.

Social media can and sometimes do shed valuable light on problems that might otherwise remain relatively unpublicized; also, by uniting them, can help their participants come up with joint solutions and alternative responses to challenges which MSM either neglects or dismisses as un-monetizable.

There’s nothing wrong in principle with branded social media, either.

However, among various things I find spooky to the point of revulsion about Twitter are as follows:
a) its name leading off with the word “twit”
b) the unbearably bird-brained argot for its use, users and their communiqués
c) the atrociously short attention-span and gaudy smugness mirrored in what passes for communication within this specific branded medium
and
d) the overweening presumption that anything it accomplishes couldn’t be done by other means.

It’s as though Twitter sort of matters, a lot even, to some people – but it doesn’t really matter at all when you take it in perspective, given its twin burdens of twee terminology and premature numerological gloating.

Sheer force of numbers never made anything right (that being the first thing about forced collectivism that makes it so appallingly odious). Given case in point Twitter is no exception here.

Also, no social media ought ever to appropriate the issues their users choose to amplify. Twitter is kind of doing that, explicitly as well as by implication, despite being (even by digital standards) still in the fad stage. Which is more than a tad immodest of it, in my opinion.

Other than that, uh yeah, sure, it’s great. It exists. It’s got a stupid name but it’s in use. So far, so good. Some day soon, something else will come along to replace it.

So my question would be, how about a social media network that doesn’t immediately twit and thus render unserious its users by stigmatizing them with idiotic names, chronic shortage of breath and the “one billion flies can’t be wrong” argument – wouldn’t that be something?

]]>
By: Gareth Wong http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate-uk/2009/10/24/can-twitter-save-the-world/comment-page-1/#comment-7833 Sat, 24 Oct 2009 14:54:00 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate-uk/?p=3906#comment-7833 how about tackling ‘end of the line’ over fishing challenge?

I will signup but don’t want to lead, as might not be able to make it!

RT @GarethWong: w/e recommended watch, esp. Fish eaters: C4’s End of the Line: http://bit.ly/1r4E4r take away, eat small fishes NOT farmed fishes

]]>