Why I Don't Twitter

People ask me why I don't twitter, or 'tweet,' or whatever verb you want to apply to the now-omnipresent site. Or, more accurately, why my Twitter account hasn't been updated in months--as lightly used as the food processor in my cabinet or a moribund Friendster profile from 2003.

Even Sarah Palin now has a Twitter account, which is probably a good litmus test as to whether something is still edgy (hint: the relationship is inverse).

People often speak about Twitter in the bemused tones they once reserved for run-of-the-mill blogging. I'm not won over. My objection stems not from issues with solipsism or excessive absorption in the minutiae of one's daily activities:

"Jared is watching American Idol"

"Jared is dropping of a shirt and the dry cleaner because he spilled Fanta on himself"

"Jared stubbed his toe"

These have become a (perhaps unfortunate) reality of our era: the blurred line betwixt public and private, where nothing is a) sacred or b) too small to report.

The reason I don't like Twitter is because it's redundant.

We're not talking rocket science here. Churning out 140-character updates on the relative quality of your lunch does not warrant its own site. Some variation of status updates on Facebook, MySpace, and LinkedIn accomplish just that--plus you're linked to lots of other features and already connected with your friends.

If you are Ashton Kutcher, Twitter might help you realize your goals of popularity--connecting, however glibly--to your legions of fans in yet another way. But if you are the hypothetical Melissa Pemberton of Salt Ste. Marie, Michigan (apologies if you actually exist, Melissa), your main goal is keeping in touch with friends. You already have a device for that: aforementioned social networking sites.

As industry colleague Steve Rubel will tell you, internet consolidation is imminent: most people will listen to music, read the news, and buy something on Amazon all through one main portal. That's still years away, and the prognosticators may well be wrong. But Twitter's fate is still grim, even in the shorter term. People will get bored, perhaps not of microblogging, but of going to a separate site when it's unnecessary. Even as we speak, Twitter's functionality is being gobbled up by the social networks; there's a robust Twitter app on Facebook. There will be no good reason to go to Twitter. The unmonetizable site will dry up and die a slow death.

It seems that I might not be alone in my displeasure. Just a few days back, Nielsen online reported that Twitter sheds 60% of its first-time users. This 40% retention rate is only expected to allow ultimately for 10% penetration of the the online community.

So, my advice to Twitter:

You held out last year's talks to be acquired by Facebook. Well done: you're now worth a lot more. But the time has come to set yourself free by selling out. We've seen what exclusive agreements can do for growth, particularly with technology that skews younger and is deemed hip (think iPhone and AT&T).

Twitter in its current incarnation is a fad, and it will fade as technology continues to make it less relevant. Make like it's 1999: tether yourself to an industry behemoth--preferably Facebook--cash in, and get out...while you still can. That, or invest like crazy in new technology to make the site more than it already is.

And, while you're at it, help Facebook figure out how to make some cash, before they go the way of The Rocky Mountain News (RIP) and snap bracelets.

Comments

[mommadona]

Twitter is deceptively simple.

Like Lao Tzu

A good traveler has no fixed plans, and is not intent on arriving.
Lao Tzu

A leader is best when people barely know he exists, when his work is done, his aim fulfilled, they will say: we did it ourselves.
Lao Tzu

http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/l/lao_tzu.html

It's a tool.

[ChicagoPost]

...continued

Two weeks ago I found out through one of my Twitter sources that the National Science Foundation had published a draft report for public comment called "Building a Sustainable Energy Future" - a report that will be the basis of a recommendation from NSF to the federal government. It was days later before I saw this report pop up in any of the RSS feeds or aggregators that I follow – and I most certainly would not have heard about it on Facebook from my mom or a former high school classmate.
Facebook is self-indulgent, and that is fine and serves a purpose and need that many people have to get personal in a very public way – but to put Twitter in the same category completely devalues the power that Twitter networks can have for people who value topic-based networking and information sharing.
So my advice to you, Jared:
Try Twitter again. Follow someone BESIDES Mr. Kutcher or your 14 year-old niece. Follow Alexis Madrigal who writes on energy and science for wired.com and who ‘tweets’ like a pro. Follow Arjun Basu, who I guarantee will entertain you. Follow Alex Tinker, Civic Engagement Director for Focus the Nation. Follow people with something to say and knowledge to share. These guys would never be your Facebook friend, but you could learn a lot from them on Twitter.

[ChicagoPost]

You're completely missing the point of Twitter. Every time someone makes the "I don't care what Ashton Kutcher had for lunch" argument about Twitter, it is clear to me that they just don't get it.
Unlike MySpace or Facebook or LinkedIn, the people I follow on Twitter, and those that follow me, are not my friends - they're my army of researchers, and I’m in theirs. Instead, we are a real-time virtual network of people who, for work or pleasure, share some of the same interests and know that as a community we can discover more about topics of interest to us, faster, than we can sitting alone with a search engine and the seemingly infinite information.
I use Twitter to track topics like renewable energy, sustainable architecture, energy policy and open innovation. Unlike ‘friends’ I may have on Facebook - with whom I might have many things in common (friends from school, family, colleagues) and might actually like to know where they went on vacation, see pictures of their new dog or get updates on their life - on Twitter those I follow and those who follow me are doing so, not because we’re friends, but because there is unique personal/professional value in the information I disseminate or they disseminate. From them, I get information faster than any other source (including Huffington Post) because they are an army of people searching and sharing information on a topic that is relevant to me in real time.

[Chi-townfool]

You mean like for the reasons the internet was really invented for? NO WAY!

[septa44]

Amen...and well said. The founders of Twitter should sell out while they can and enjoy the good life before the hype ends and people come to their senses. the over-hype of Twitter is covered at Twitter Backlash http://www.twitterbacklash.comm) and here: http://www.alternet.org/mediaculture/127623/twitter_nation_has_arrived:_how_scared_should_we_be//)

[Sumocat]

Here's why you don't Twitter: you compared it to blogging and social networking, but you didn't mention text messaging. Twitter boils down to published text messaging. If texting wasn't popular, Twitter wouldn't be popular. Likewise, it won't fall out of favor until texting does, and I don't see that happening any time soon.

[CowboyDenver]

Twitter is for twits.