Is Twitter A Bubble Phenomenon?

Make your call NOW - see who's right in a year or several.

Like Drum says:

http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2009/04/tweet

"(But is Twitter a bubble? For those of you who think bubbles are easy to spot while they're happening, you need to answer Right Now. And show your work, please. In a couple of years we'll find out which of you was right.)"

Just like blogging.

And every now and then you see a 'duck-tail' haircut complete with about a barrel of Brillcream's finest.

Yup, the oldies are still around.

Isn't it nothing but a glorified message board?:shrug:

...before it. That makes it a FAD - with an exceptionally silly and, frankly LAME marketing name. Twiiter/tweeting?:eyes:

It occupies a completely different space within the communication field.

It's most suitable for activities like liveblogging and public safety comms.

If a news outlet, such as CNN or MSNBC, CHOSE to link up to DU instead of Twitter, would the speed, capacity, and quality of communications increase?:shrug:

Teh stupid burns in your own brain, Bloo...:eyes:

And yours was one.

...methinks you have no clue what you're talking about if you cannot even reply to my very simple question(s).

Cooley Hurd is NOT surprised by this by the way...:rofl:

...devoid of answers or substance!:rofl:

Bloo, you're my favorite DVoid DUer!:hi::D

:rofl:

This Bloo/Cooley/Dennis thing has been going on for YEARS!:rofl:

Twitter isn't designed for nested and highly-structured discussions. Like IRC and other real-time antecedents, it's flat - and indeed its shallowness is reflected in the way most people use it. Someone else referred to it as 'micro-blogging' and that's a very good description. This isn't bad because there's a place for such communication - just as there is for walkie-talkies and push-to-talk phones (which are essentially the same thing spread over a wider network. They're very useful within their own contexts; just because you wouldn't want to have an extended conversation over a walkie-talkie doesn't mean a cellphone is always better.

...because questions, by nature, are merely queries designed to discover the unknown to the questioner.

By your logic, no "question" can EVER be allowed.

Are you Bloo's Mom, or something?:shrug:

:D

By nature, people grow, learn and evolve. Since the Leopold wars in 2005/2006, I have done all three. Can you say the same, fool?;)

is not their mom. Durr.

:rofl:

Too easy, Bloo.:hi:

...and it's fundamentally wrong, then it invalidates your question.

As so often in the past, the Onion unintentionally reveals the awful truth...

"CHICAGO—In a surprising refutation of the conventional wisdom on opinion entitlement, a study conducted by the University of Chicago's School for Behavioral Science concluded that more than one-third of the U.S. population is neither entitled nor qualified to have opinions.

<...>

"In 2002, Fultz's team shook the academic world by conclusively proving the existence of both bad ideas during brainstorming and dumb questions during question-and-answer sessions."

...



....



.....:rofl:

:rofl:

...satire such as the Onion, being as subtle, yet cutting as it is, would indicate that my "level" is quite elevated.:D

Your move, Bloo!:D

communicate with texters out there, away from their desks and not tied to their laptops. I know I could do the same thing with FaceBook, but FB has a bunch of stuff we don't need.

Ability to elicit immediate responses of various types, with minimal interruption of other tasking.

I'm not using it right now, but I can think of a lot about my job that would be served by Twitter.

A "true progressive" would clearly just hate twitter without thinking about or understanding it, because it's new and kids use it.

:P

workweek, using a variety of communication tools, some require detailed "essays" explaining this or that, others need short reminders, some need quick answers to immediate questions, still others need access to selections of documents, others need to be referred to someone else, some of what is communicated is extempore, some is canned, some of this goes to individuals, the rest of it goes to groups of various sizes, some of it is needed immediately, some of it is for future reference.

Since I'm a nexus, though we're not Twittering yet, we're going to if I have anything to say about it. My colleagues are not just real tech comfortable yet, but I'm working on them. Gotta get them used to writing effective Subject: lines for email FIRST.

each suited for a particular communication need.

Rather, clearly the only thing that makes sense is to use exactly the tools currently available for ANY communications need. Regardless of efficiency or appropriateness.

Get with the program, please.

:P

I personally like twitter (yeah OK I agree the name is stupid) but I like being able to read quick bullets with links from people who I follow...I hate myspace and don't particularily like facebook either so for me to actually like using twitter is pretty unusual.

I am no kid lol so I didn't know kids were into it!

I have been surprised by the number of people who apparently detest using twitter!

And yah on the kneejerk derision. Methinks DUers are (again) like typical Americans more than they'd admit.

I kind of like the cut and dry quality of twitter. I am not always in the mood to hear people's musical selections, view five million photos and read long blog commentary.

I think the net has given me ADD over the years! lol

http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Atwitter.com+plant+%22water+me%22

"I'm thirsty"

"Water me"

"Thank you for watering me"



Before twitter, how on earth did anyone remember to water their plants?

to see includes a ton of websites which post the headlines and links whenever they add a new story or thread.

You get Breaking News from a variety of sources you choose as soon as they get posted - NYT, MSNBC, The Hill, WSJ, Marketwatch, Think Progress, Media Matters, etc. AND posts telling you when blogs you like post a new story or thread - The Daily Dish, Daily Kos, AmericaBlog, Wonkette, Swampland, etc.

You can also talk to reporters - ask questions, complain, point out information you think they aren't aware of, etc - along with find out what they are doing on their shows, who they'll have on, etc.

You can also respond to politicians like Claire McCaskill, Grassley, etc.

There are also people - like on DU - who post while watching the same shows, who have similar POV - bitch about Tweety, or laugh hysterically at Anna Marie Cox and Maddow on Rachel's show. Anna Marie Cox posts on Twitter all the time so you know when she is going to be on the show and what the topic is, along with assorted green room, press availability gossipy stuff (she loves Orszag). People on Twitter become like friends on DU sharing what is going on, what is cracking them up and pissing them off, etc. The chatter by the Democrats and Dem bloggers on the tea bag crap has been quite entertaining, ACORN is also the root of all evil.

That is my quick synopsis of its appeal. It takes a little while to figure it out and it all depends on who you choose to "follow".

Also, you don't have to post anything about yourself or what you are doing.

...of course, the OP has issues with communication to begin with.;)

:hi:

:hi:

As best I can tell, the purpose of Twitter, as the larger crowd uses it, is for self-promotion.

Reading DU on your computer is fine, but imagine trying to do so on an iPhone or blackberry - all that formatting gets in the way. Additionally twitter is a feed, so you don't have to go to twitter.com, you cna use a third-party application to read it (and search for or screen out 'tweets' from sources of varying relevance).

It's extremely useful for small groups of people who need to send brief status messages to each other but which don't necessarily need real-time interaction. On the other hand such useful, pragmatic utility probably only makes up about 5% of the traffic on twitter, much of which consists of things like 'OMG! I stuck my hand in the toaster over and it burned' (something one of my friends felt compelled to inform the world about yesterday...I'd be too embarrassed to advertise my stupidity, but hey).

It will be around for a long time, but I still voted bubble because I don't think it's going to generate all that much money for anyone, any more than IRC did.

:hi:

I don't actually use Twitter very much and find it terribly irritating. But I can understand the huge popularity stemming from its novelty factor, combined with extreme ease of use. A lot of technological things go through stages like this...

a. it's awkward to do (something) so someone cooks up or modify's a tool to make it easy
b. lots of people who hadn't 'needed' the tool find it solves a problem and it gains popularity
c. vast numbers of people latch onto it 'because it's there' and they feel it's important, even if they're not sure why
d. there's a backlash against it from people who see it becoming widespread but not necessarily useful
e. a small number like 5% become power users and either make money out of it or use it to enhance what they do
f. it becomes ubiquitous and people find uses for it which were never anticipated

I just made this up off the top of my head so it's not exact but you can see the same pattern with cellphones, email, even the internet itself. I've been on the internet >20 years which is more than most but I latch onto some things way early and other things long after the train has left the station. I still don't have a webcam for example, even though I own multiple still and video cameras. It's just the nature of technology.

5 things you'll read about in the next 18 months

Shakespeare play staged on twitter
Novel written on twitter, but nobody realizes what it is at first; wins prize
Husband divorces wife via twitter
Companies fire people via twitter
Man commits suicide on twitter

I really do not give a fuck who twitters what. I just do not want it to be any part of the news.

But they're forced to use it in order to keep up and look hip. The more news exposure Twitter gets, the quicker it should go away.

But only in its current form. Twitter and Facebook (or some other social networking platform) will probably merge (since Twitter is a better way of responding to status messages). As long as the Internet is around, this type of information sharing will be available and used.

but Twitter, yes, easily.

I remember back when WordPress and Blogger were supposed to be the next HUGE things. And before that, it was ICQ and AIM.

Know what the problem was and why they never became the Google-like entities everyone was proclaiming they might become?

The technology is easy to reproduce.

When Facebook tried to buy Twitter and was turned down, they almost instantly turned their user pages into a Twitter style format. They weren't looking to buy Twitter for their technology, they were trying to buy it for their user base. Their network.

Because user networks are far more valuable than the underlying technology, and they can be quickly abandoned when something better comes along. That's why it's best to build your network until it doesn't seem to grow anymore, sell it to the highest bidder, and start the next thing with the capital you've gained.

I say teeny bubble gum. That many people do not have lives?

But I think it will take more than a year.

It's biggest appeal right now is with bloggers who think it will help them monetize what they're doing. The reality is it's people using the favor bank in hopes for a return, and they're going to find out soon enough it's not happening.

Micro-blogging is another form of semi-real time, networked communication. Micro-blogging will continue.

:)

When you name a product for a word already in the English lexicon, the use of that product does not take on a wholly new meaning, especially when the use of that product is directly analogous to the actions described in the original word.

Not unless you're an online marketer trying to sell your brand, I suppose.

The first ones to receive the attention usually get to live forever in the public lexicon. Band-Aid. Kleenex. The list goes on.

I have to vote yes. Twitter will be around as long as self-obsessed twits think that others are as fascinated as themselves with the puerile details of their daily life.

er... nevermind, that was stupid. there is no limit to self-obsessed twits thinking that others are as fascinated as themselves with the puerile details of their daily life.

being the star of your own soap opera. Sad.

Or shortly thereafter.

People are now being stalked because of Twitter and the weird need to let everyone where they're going and what they'll be doing.
Frankly I don't give a shit where someone is or what they are doing so I don't bother with Twitter.
I hope it goes away.

follows or meets them at that location.

Now they are telling people to only tweet about where they WERE as opposed to where they will BE.

what is posted I'd have to take a guess as to how Twitter works.
If you can allow only a select few to read what you post I'd guess that would be best.

Everyone can read everything you write.

If you have a private profile, everyone who is on your "Followers" list can read everything you write. You will never have a private conversation using the regular Tweet method, although you can send private messages the way you would on MySpace or DU.

and being able to lump all the headlines together by poster.

Just my humble opinion (and not, I don't tweet, twat, or twitter - do read it sometimes though)

A lot of people do just that, really.

Wait, I might know the answer to that...:D

:rofl:

:rofl:

of setting one up.

people griping, groaning, and gnashing their teeth over Twitter, instead of just ignoring it if they don't like it or aren't creative enough to come up with unique ways to take advantage of it, is here to stay, for the time being.

The question reminds me of asking, "is Friendster/Napster/ICQ a bubble phenomenon?" The particular business? Yes, it was. The concept? Certainly not.