41423200’s Reflection - To Tweet or not to Tweet, that is the Question

Introduction

It seems that humanity cannot enjoy a single week of peace before another ten social networking sites are hurled into cyberspace. They vary in function, but all strive towards the ultimate goal: Connecting people. But is there a connection? And if so, is it one worth maintaining? The following blog post will attempt to answer these questions.

Though I personally dislike social networking sites, the nourishing, syrup-coated wedge of bloggery to come will not descend into an incomprehensible rant about my esteemed loathing of Facebook and pointless sites such as “My Flat-mate is an Annoying Cretin.com” or “Hands up if Harpsichords are your Favourite Beverage.org.” Instead it will voice what I consider a reasoned argument based upon my personal experiences over the past weeks, as well as sources ranging from lecture notes to satirical cartoons. NB. Due to the communal nature of social networking, I feel that a “man on the street” perspective is somewhat more useful than heavy duty academic writings. Having said this, I will not rely on “lol-speak” quotations from the likes of tHunderlizArd217 and company.

Background

For the purposes of this reflection, I shall primarily draw from my experiences using two examples of social software: Twitter is a tool that allows the user to write “micro-blogs” describing their current activities in 140 characters or less. Users can then follow others to keep in touch. Last.fm uses a downloaded plug-in (i.e. for iTunes) to track all songs that one listens to and uploads them to their profile. This information is then analysed to provide recommendations of more music determined by what other users with similar tastes have in their libraries.

Focus

This article revolves around Grudin’s (1994) argument dealing with “direct benefit from the use of the application” and his “critical mass” theory, which states that social software “can fail because it is never to any one individual’s advantage to use it” respectively (see lecture slides here).

Reflection

The “direct benefit” of using the aforementioned systems is arguably the most crucial issue. The satirical cartoon from SuperNews, “Trouble with Twitter” summarises the micro-blog’s purpose, stating “you can let everyone know exactly what you’re doing or thinking at all times, no matter how trivial, mundane or embarrassing.” It continues, explaining “Twitter is just people bragging about their unexceptional lives.” The phrase “many a true word spoken in jest” leaps to the forefront of my mind. What exactly is the benefit of Twitter?

During my experience, I primarily followed the activities of two friends, a lecturer (that’s right Viller, I’m watching you) and British comedian and all-round genius Stephen Fry (who currently has over 386,000 followers). As something of a sceptic, I vowed to give the system as much of a chance as possible, hoping it would restore the faith I never had. Sure enough, I was kept up-to-date... but to what end? Did my pulse quicken when I discovered the astounding truth that one of my friends was eating toast? The answer: a resounding no.

A popular justification of Twitter is that it allows large groups of people to organise gatherings. Only recently, my lecturer twittered (or should that be twote?) that he would be late due to parking difficulties. The fact that I knew this did not solve the problem. Admittedly, the individual scenario plays a significant role, but one cannot help but take offense at the implication that people lack sufficient initiative to adapt to a change in routine without being spoon-fed every detail. After all, is dealing with ambiguity and uncertainty not the very essence of an interesting life?

Second is the arguably more significant widespread belief that Twitter allows people to stay connected and communicate with each other. A fair claim to be sure, yet as I scour the vast and brimming chasm of my short-term memory, I fail to recall any occasion when I felt connected to anyone. To my continued astonishment, I do not feel repulsed, disgusted, contemptuous or any of the things I expected to feel while twittering. Therein lies the problem. The act was so soulless and exasperatingly dull that I couldn’t even summon up a twisted ball of hatred. I felt nothing.

As far as communication is concerned, one might as well try to heliograph with a pillow instead of a mirror. Text-based communication can be frustrating at the best of times - more than once, I have offended people by email because my words seemed harsh or rude when separated from the vocal expression and body language that would normally accompany them. With enough words, one can clarify one’s meaning, but when restricted to 140 characters, no amount of lol-speak abbreviations or emoticons can adequately communicate one’s true sentiment.

In an earlier paragraph I mentioned Stephen Fry. I won’t waste time dwelling on his thoroughly entertaining body of work, though I would recommend a lengthy Google session and perhaps subscription to his free podcast. The fact is that Mr. Fry is extremely intelligent, possessing almost unrivaled eloquence. He is therefore a prime example of the damage caused by Twitter. Unable to communicate using his extensive vocabulary, there is little indication to those unfamiliar with his career of his intellect, in his tweets.

It can therefore be said that the only “rewards” of using Twitter are confusion, frustration, and the distinct impression that we are descending into an anti-intellectualist pit of mediocrity and misunderstanding where we are all forced to pander to the lowest common denominator.

By stark contrast, the benefit of using Last.fm is immediately clear. As a person who enjoys less-contemporary genres of music such as progressive rock, I was understandably surprised when my iTunes library was “scrobbled” and recommendations were actually given. Furthermore, I was shocked at how efficient a system this was, returning songs that accurately reflected my eclectic musical taste. As a result, I have spent a considerable amount of time and money obtaining new albums, both from bands I knew and some rather obscure ones of which I was previously unaware.

Aside from this direct reward, I did feel significantly more connected to other people. Unlike the meaningless chat found on Twitter, music has united people for decades. Whether to “let them know it’s Christmas time” in the 1980s, bring ladies and gentlemen together with an 18th Century quadrille, or let thousands congregate for the sheer thrill of a rock festival, there are few other mediums that communicate energy and meaning so well. I may not be incredibly keen to tell everyone online that Cyndi Lauper’s “Girls Just Wanna Have Fun” was the last song I listened to, but it is a small sacrifice if I can discover a new album of ‘70s hard rock or a heavy metal band from Finland.

Last.fm also succeeds where Twitter fails regarding Grudin’s “critical mass” theory. I was able to reap the benefits of Last.fm’s functionality without interacting with a single person, though there was always the option to do so. It was this flexibility of depth that made the software so appealing. However, using Twitter without following other people was a totally pointless exercise. I was forced to socialise, which proved to be just as much of a conversation stopper (if any exchange on Twitter can be called a “conversation”) as asking somebody “what shall we talk about?” when speaking face-to-face.

Thus far it seems that I have been a little overzealous in my criticism of Twitter, perhaps implying that Last.fm is faultless. This is by no means the case. There is one troubling aspect that these two sites share, both with each other and many others: The encouragement of an addiction to self-affirmation.

In a page from techcrunch.com entitled “Twitter: Something is Technically Wrong,” the author (Arrington, 2008) recounts a recent experience: “I’m in a particularly bad mood because I have food poisoning... and twittering it was going to make me feel marginally better because a bunch of people would say something nice in a reply.” It is part of human nature to desire belonging within a group, but the desperate insecurity exhibited and tenuous social connections made cause the mind to reel with despair.

Another British comedian and Twitter user, Russell Brand, has compared twittering and certain private activities as a means of wasting time (see news cutting here). Though jovial, this statement can be applied here. Considering the persona of an insecure, desperate individual who clings to the illusion of human contact to feel better about themselves though ultimately achieving nothing of the sort, Twitter, and indeed all social software, can be seen as the technological equivalent of masturbation.

Conclusion

Through a combination of my experiences and a variety of sources, I have come to a decision regarding the merit of social networking sites. There is no doubt that these tools have a role to play, but as yet, they are merely a different way of accomplishing tasks that are already simple, rather than applications which truly enrich society. In some shape or form, the elusive social connection is present in Last.fm and Twitter, and far be it from me to berate those who do feel that social software is a valid means of communication.

This has been a reflection of my experiences and mine alone. By using these sites, I have gained a new perspective. Certainly, I shall discontinue use of Twitter, but Last.fm will remain a frequent web destination. Importantly, my opinions of these systems are now based upon rational thought rather than my general loathing of the “in-crowd.” Shirky (2003) states that “if the software doesn't allow the core group to express itself, it will invent new ways of doing so.” In spite of the plenitude of both my complaint and evaluation, my appraisal and contempt, it is the users as a collective who will determine the merit of a system. To each his own. We are all individuals.

References

Sources are found throughout the article in the form of hyperlinks to the appropriate pages.