eaves.ca: Twitter is my Newspaper: explaining twitter to newbies
georgeweyman
· 2 months ago
I like the metaphor Twitter is a personalized gateway to other content on the web. Can't remember where I heard that.
Dan Slee
· 2 months ago
Great post!
MadameDotty
· 2 months ago
This is a great post. I couldn't agree with you more. I too felt awkward when I first started using Twitter and it took me a couple of months for me to "get" it. But once that "enlightenment" came (lol) it became addictive. I have noticed as of late I am always aware of the latest breaking news, even trade gossip, hours before it is printed on newspapers or broadcast on TV because...I heard it on Twitter first.
Also, whereas I only read the Guardian for national news, Twitter allows me to pick up juicy or controversial articles done by the other nationals without me having to buy or skim through all of them. Yes, I hear some people saying: "But you could find these things out on the Internet anyway. Or, just google the topic you're interested in." But Twitter communication is faster than you looking up on the Internet (the information is only one click away as the link is on the tweet) and, as you say, it's already been "vetted" by people in the know, so it saves you skimming time.
Twitter is my newspaper too. Those who think it's a "chat room" for vacuous conversation about what they had for breakfast are missing out on the sweet "dessert" aspect of it. :)
Kim Feraday
· 2 months ago
OK it seems lately I'm always the dissenter on your posts. But using twitter as an information feed is useful but misses one of the most important uses -- as a means of participating in asynchronous conversations.
The other point I would make with respect to newspapers is that if this is the only mechanism you use to get information then you're going to have a very myopic view of the world. There will be no dissonant opinions or new perspectives. That's one of the most useful services newspapers provide (at least until social search becomes a lot better). They vet other points of view and information that I might not go out of my way to find myself.
David Eaves
· 2 months ago
Kim, thank you for the comment. I think you've taken my newspaper metaphor literally. I'm not saying the Twitter is a newspaper - I'm saying that it how people use a newspaper is a helpful metaphor for explaining how many people use twitter.
I don't disagree that it can be used as a means for participating in asynchronous conversations but in my experience (and observing others) this represents a tiny fraction of its use. How many tweets that come through your feed are part of a conversation you actively participate in 1-2%? If that? Moreover, asynchronous conversations is what email does - which is precisely why this use case is the worst way to explain twitter since people feel they need to read all their emails - they very opposite feeling they should have about tweets. Talking about twitter as a vehicle for asynchronous conversations - I suspect - increases misunderstanding about why the technology is valuable.
On a completely separate note - I also strongly disagree that newspapers provide dissonant opinions. At best newspapers are the vehicles for the bland - vetting opinions that will not offend or overly challenge anyone. At worst (and more common) they are ideologically focused and so don't provide diversity: you rarely see highly conservative views in the NYT or liberal views in the Wall Street Journal. I simply can't concede that newspapers offer more diversity than twitter. Indeed, quite the opposite. With a newspaper subscription you choose a perspective and are stuck with it. With twitter you can choose to subscribe to as many people with different and opposing perspectives as you wish. In both cases the choice is the readers - but the offering on twitter is much, much, much, more diverse.
Larry
· 2 months ago
it's a social info feed :)
Rebecca Wheeler
· 1 month ago
What a brilliant analogy. I'm sure I'll be using it in the future to explain how and why I use Twitter to those that don't "get" it.
Have you come across The Twitter Times (a personalised online newspaper that pulls its content from your Twitter connections)? I think it's a nice example of just how accurate and relevant your Twitter-is-my-newspaper analogy is!
Hi Rebecca - funnily enough, I came across The Twitter Times the afternoon after I posted this (or was it the next day). Was quite excited to see it!
Facebook User
· 1 month ago
Its amazing to me to see how many people fail to see the potential in Twitter and services like it. I usually use this link to show folks that Twitter is not just about what Kim and Larry had for lunch: http://twitter.com/the_pub_debates
All Comments
Also, whereas I only read the Guardian for national news, Twitter allows me to pick up juicy or controversial articles done by the other nationals without me having to buy or skim through all of them. Yes, I hear some people saying: "But you could find these things out on the Internet anyway. Or, just google the topic you're interested in." But Twitter communication is faster than you looking up on the Internet (the information is only one click away as the link is on the tweet) and, as you say, it's already been "vetted" by people in the know, so it saves you skimming time.
Twitter is my newspaper too. Those who think it's a "chat room" for vacuous conversation about what they had for breakfast are missing out on the sweet "dessert" aspect of it. :)
The other point I would make with respect to newspapers is that if this is the only mechanism you use to get information then you're going to have a very myopic view of the world. There will be no dissonant opinions or new perspectives. That's one of the most useful services newspapers provide (at least until social search becomes a lot better). They vet other points of view and information that I might not go out of my way to find myself.
I don't disagree that it can be used as a means for participating in asynchronous conversations but in my experience (and observing others) this represents a tiny fraction of its use. How many tweets that come through your feed are part of a conversation you actively participate in 1-2%? If that? Moreover, asynchronous conversations is what email does - which is precisely why this use case is the worst way to explain twitter since people feel they need to read all their emails - they very opposite feeling they should have about tweets. Talking about twitter as a vehicle for asynchronous conversations - I suspect - increases misunderstanding about why the technology is valuable.
On a completely separate note - I also strongly disagree that newspapers provide dissonant opinions. At best newspapers are the vehicles for the bland - vetting opinions that will not offend or overly challenge anyone. At worst (and more common) they are ideologically focused and so don't provide diversity: you rarely see highly conservative views in the NYT or liberal views in the Wall Street Journal. I simply can't concede that newspapers offer more diversity than twitter. Indeed, quite the opposite. With a newspaper subscription you choose a perspective and are stuck with it. With twitter you can choose to subscribe to as many people with different and opposing perspectives as you wish. In both cases the choice is the readers - but the offering on twitter is much, much, much, more diverse.
Have you come across The Twitter Times (a personalised online newspaper that pulls its content from your Twitter connections)? I think it's a nice example of just how accurate and relevant your Twitter-is-my-newspaper analogy is!
I wrote a blog about The Twitter Times that you might find interesting if you have time to read it: http://www.coastdigital.co.uk/whats-new/blog/20....
I've got a shorter way to explain Twitter (it's like sex) - http://tinyurl.com/ygwebh7