Twitter and Tweet.

[zeemike]

A plan to destroy democracy by making it’s institutions irrelevant.

I only just recently learned what twitter and tweet was…I am slow to adopt new technology.
But I have wondered about things…like why people walk down the street, of stroll through the grocery store or even while driving…have a cell phone on their ear.
And saying something like …”Yes I am just walking back to the car…I got the milk”. It kind of makes conversations irrelevant. Why tell the story of your trip to the store when you gave a blow by blow description over the phone in real time. Probably complete with video. And so the conversation can be only “get us some milk” or “here’s the milk“…now I will play video games while you find some way to amuse yourself.
And why some people have the TV on the news channel and playing video games and it is such a nice day outside and the birds are signing….well you know….but I digress.

Any plan to destroy democracy must include controlling or destroying communications. Without communications a democracy can be robbed blind and the population enslaved without any effective oppositions.
So Twittering and Tweeting is an attempt to make the communication of
information and ideas irrelevant. And gives the rumor mill a platform to work on and keep us busy with trivia while they do what they want …out of our sight and out of our mind.

But I don’t think it will work…events have made people interested in changing things….The truth is cast down and it will prosper.

[NeedleCast]

1. Oy

You're failure to understand this technology is mind boggling. You reduce the technology to it's basest component without giving fair time to any of its usefullness.

What you're ranting about could be applies to literally any communications technology. It's like watching a terrible movie and saying that no one should watch movies based on that one viewing of a bad movie.

[zeemike]

10. Perhaps you are right.

But old tech like the print media and books and real news programs required more thought and time, and therefore more exercise of the mussel between the ears.
But maybe I am just old.

[dem629]

16. I think you're spot-on with that.

The design itself plays into the short-attention span and dumbed-down nature of our society.

[liberal N proud]

2. Those who twitter are twits

[NeedleCast]

4. Al Gore, Obama, Maddow, hundreds of liberal organizations

Barbra Boxer, Durban, Fiengold, Kucinich (I can go on for awhile...)

Guess they are all twits?

[liberal N proud]

5. What would you call them? Twitterers

Tweetterers?
Twats or twatterers?

Twits works.

[NeedleCast]

6. So your reply to the OP was not intended as an insult to those who use/follow Twitter feeds?

Because thats what it seemed like. I'm just pointing out that Twitter is more than a bunch of self-centered people who don't have anything better to do than jabber about the fact that they're out getting coffee or at the grocery store.

[liberal N proud]

7. Not really

I see twitter as an annoyance but to each his own.

I don't use instant messenger either. When our company implemented Microsoft Communicator (instant messaging), I put a message on my messenger that I would not utilize the program and provided my phone number, office and email address requesting that anyone wishing to contact me use those tools.

Email is enough of an annoyance when you are trying to concentrate on work.

[Joe Fields]

12. pretty much, when it comes to twitter. Sixty percent of people who

open a twitter account close it within a month. Another bad idea that will fad out.

[dem629]

15. That's the good news. Then something worse will come along.

[dem629]

14. Pretty much, or at least playing to the dumbed-down society.

Say something, but make sure you do it in 140 characters or less -- we wouldn't want anyone to have to pay attention very long.

Oh, and also, one of the founders said that one of the great things about it is that people don't worry about spelling.

Great!

[Lex]

3. I hope that's parody.

Otherwise, it's mind-boggling in its misconceptions on so many levels.

[DS1]

8. "A plan to destroy democracy by making it’s institutions irrelevant."

Apparently starting with its grammar.

[tabatha]

9. How have they controlled content?

"So Twittering and Tweeting is an attempt to make the communication of information and ideas irrelevant?"

A doctor used twitter to communicate the progress of an operation. That would be communicating ideas that are relevant.

I have seen twitter used by students in communicating status of courses, etc.

Your twat about twitter is not logical.

[zeemike]

11. Not trying to put anyone down.

And i like what Gandhi said...If a tool is useful use it, if it becomes necessary through it away.
But i always think of what Orwell had to say about controlling people by controlling the language...and part of that was reducing what is said to it's simplest terms...and it seems to me that twittering is in that same vain.

[tabatha]

13. Something interesting.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-et-onthemedia11-2009may11,0,4582973.column?track=rss

[blogslut]

17. Take heart

From the Nielson/Net-Ratings blog:

Follow Vs. Follow-through

Currently, more than 60 percent of U.S. Twitter users fail to return the following month, or in other words, Twitter’s audience retention rate, or the percentage of a given month’s users who come back the following month, is currently about 40 percent. For most of the past 12 months, pre-Oprah, Twitter has languished below 30 percent retention.

To understand why this poses a problem for Twitter, check out the chart below. By plotting the minimum retention rates for different Internet audience sizes, it is clear that a retention rate of 40 percent will limit a site’s growth to about a 10 percent reach figure. To be clear, a high retention rate doesn’t guarantee a massive audience, but it is a prerequisite. There simply aren’t enough new users to make up for defecting ones after a certain point.

link: http://blog.nielsen.com/nielsenwire/online_mobile/twitter-quitters-post-roadblock-to-long-term-growth/