Tweets on Twitter

Twitter equals twaddle, and I just don’t have the patience!! 

 

Twitter is an apt name for the new micro-blogging Web site, whose name sounds to me like a combination of the words “trivial chatter.”  It reminds me of the cutesy terms for meaningless talk, like “gibber-jabber,” “twaddle,” “prattle” and “babble.”  And, in many cases, that’s all Twitter-users do. 

The micro-blogs themselves are referred to as “tweets,” a word that connotes something short and sweet, as the blogs are meant to be, but also often meaningless.  Who can discern the purpose of a bird’s idle chatter, either?   

The site, which has only existed since spring 2006, has attracted more than 5 million users.  The micro-bloggers, who can only write notes that are 140 characters or less, join for a variety of reasons and with diverse agendas, many political. 

In fact, Barack Obama has been tweeting about his thoughts and activities throughout the campaign (not surprisingly, he’s been quiet since the morning after the election.)  Web sites like Politico.com posted a twitter feed during the presidential and vice presidential debates in which political experts responded to the candidates’ comments and behavior.

Corporations use Twitter to keep customers abreast of company news, but also to promote products and services and hopefully receive customer feedback.  Universities use Twitter to distribute information to students and faculty.  Even the American Red Cross tweets to get minute-by-minute updates from areas affected by natural disaster. 

Used this way, micro-blogging is an effective medium for delivering succinct and meaningful bits of information.  It’s a bit like text messaging, but on a wider scale.  But, the majority of the time, this isn’t how the technology is used. 

“Some people use it just to inform their friends about what they are doing minute-by-minute,” said Janna Anderson, director of a research project called Imagining the Internet.  “For instance writing things like, ‘I just voted for Obama, and now I’m headed over to Starbucks to get my free cup of Election Day coffee.’”  Often, the tweets are even less informative than that. 

The Twitter homepage displays the 20 most recent tweets and the time that they were posted—always within seconds of the moment that you open the page. 

People are tweeting tirelessly as I write this.  The homepage is lined with the brief and wondrous thoughts of 20 Internet addicts, many of whom are tweeting from foreign countries.  “Using the computer at work,” says one.  No kidding.

“On Travel Channels Website!!!” says another. 

“I freakin HATE gnats!!!!!!”

“Eating Gimme Jimmy’s cookies, a local delicacy.”  Who really cares what you snack on? 

After sifting through the irrelevant information for several minutes, I stumbled across something valuable:  apparently Hillary Clinton has agreed to serve as Secretary of State.  This is, of course, very interesting information.  And, admittedly, I did learn it by hanging out on Twitter. 

However, had I been cruising news Web sites rather than writing this blog, I would have gotten that information 52 minutes ago when the Associated Press confirmed it. 

“I signed up for Twitter because a lot of my family members were doing it,” said David East, a junior studying strategic communications.  “But they always talked about mundane things all day, like what they were eating and watching on TV and stuff, and I got bored really fast of looking at it.” 

So, I guess my question is, if the Internet is instantaneous by nature, then why do we need a site like Twitter, which demands that information be so short that it is almost always shallow?  Does sifting through riffraff justify the occasional nuggets of information distributed by potentially inaccurate sources? 

I don’t have to read a list of insipid commentary made by my friends, family and colleagues to hear about breaking news, so why would I?