3 ms·
The use case is that people are online, at their computer and see their Twitter client notify them of an interesting sound update while they were wasting away t
by jschuur 16y ago
The use case is that people are online, at their computer and see their Twitter client notify them of an interesting sound update while they were wasting away time, procrastinating or just plain looking for some diversion. They see an update from a source they trust and decide to click through to read it.
That's not a very far stretch. People read things from Twitter all the time, that's not the problem. The issue is they only read the most recent stuff river of news style and who knows how many people they follow?
Leo's Buzz to Twitter cross-poster should have had some kind of link tracking built into the URL to tell him if people were clicking on his updates.
Leo says he had 15 updates in 2 weeks not broadcast, but when you look at his usual posting style, it's all notifications about his recent shows (which I get via iTunes automatically) and (self confessed) pictures of food he's eating. That's not exactly quality material that people will click through to. Had he posted more appealing content, his lack of updates would have been a greater loss.
- elblanco 16y ago>it's all notifications about his recent shows (which I get via iTunes automatically) and (self confessed) pictures of food he's eating Leo, after the thousands of words he's written promoting these types of social media, found out that that's what most people are writing about, trivialities of interest to no-one/notification information we already have two dozen ways of getting...and thus everybody finds everybody else's tweets annoying and instantly put into that same part of the brain that selectively ignores web advertising. That's why nobody noticed. I doubt most people would notice if most of the people they follow stopped tweeting. They're probably ignoring most of it anyway.