In Defense Of Twitter

Have you been to a news web site, read a newspaper or a magazine within the past six months? If so, you have no doubt heard about Twitter, a popular microblogging service. And yet, some of those stories don't get the point of the service at all. 

Take for instance, this column from LATimes.com. The fiery columnist -- who, to be fair and throw a compliment her way, is an excellent writer and writes a compelling column -- says this about the program in her conclusion: ". . . along with "what am I doing right now?" maybe it's time to ask "what the hell are we doing"?" Her take on the system is that the tweets bring people down to an idiotic, superficial level, full of uninteresting details on the mundane events of every persons right.

Before we go any further, I must disclose this: I tweet. A lot. So much so that I know what a hash tag is, I @ reply someone, I know what a DM is, along with a RT. My screenname is @charlesjurries. 

What these columnists, who no doubt need to find a ax to grind to meet deadline, fail to miss is that the "mundane" aspects of a persons life are what makes a person a person. Does everybody care that I was walking around downtown Grand Rapids? No. But some do. Maybe they haven't been in a while. Maybe they're expecting some pictures from that afternoon (sorry, the answer is "no"). Maybe someone didn't take me to be the person to spend an afternoon down in GR. 

Its those kinds of simple details that make us a complete person. Imagine if your random thoughts on your niches, and your life details, were each a piece of straw. Over time, your Twitter feed would give your followers a more complete scarecrow, a sense not only what this person does, but how they think. 

Does Twitter have some superficial people on it, full of just mind-numbing boring tweets? Yes. You don't have to follow them. You follow who you want, at your pleasure. If you find them interesting, if they give you a unique insight into their world, into others, that's why you'll go to them. People don't want to be bored. So they won't allow themselves to be. 

Another advantage Twitter has over traditional blog posts: It cuts right to the chase. While you can say a lot in 140 characters (their limit), it also limits you to creatively say what you want in a concise sentence or two. No bloating. No filibustering. You have to say what you mean, the first time. This amazingly forced clarity helps to improve communication (surprising, right?) and the exchange of ideas. 

Another thing... Twitter can be a conversation starter. By tweeting those fleeting - but momentarily important - thoughts, instead of forgetting them, you could (and I have) wind up talking about more conversation points than before. 

Does Twitter and the world of microblogging have a ways to go? Yes. In future years, Twitter could turn out to be the Xanga of this genre, the early adaptor that is improved upon by a better service. For what we have right now, though, its pretty good. And its good to know what's on your mind right now. Because it makes you more of a whole person. It allows me to pick what's on your mind. And you on mine. 

Go ahead and let the doubters doubt. They've picked on the negatives and refuse to see any positives, and chances are, will not allow themselves to. They've created Twitter to be this sort of terrible ideal, many times without columnists giving it a fair chance. (At times, I wonder if some writers have even signed up for the service at all, and instead are reading Ashton Kutcher's feed and coming to their own conclusions.) 

* Sorry if this post seemed a little disjointed. I was just writing down what was on my mind. (Oh, writer's snap!)