6 ms·

Changing the world via Twitter? Yeah, you should get out more

57 points by OoTheNigerian 16y ago

joshklein 16y ago
The question isn't whether or not social media activism is a powerful replacement for "real life" activism. The question is whether or not the people participating in social media activism would be doing anything at all if it weren't so easy to participate. Did the activist marching on Washington retreat to his desk, or did the couch potato join the movement? I don't know the answer, but the difference is an important one.
maeon3 16y ago
What about the scientology protests? I think there was an element of social media fueling that fire.
- lsc 16y ago
  really? 4chan as an example of the positive power of social media? heh.
nkassis 16y ago
I don't know if it's a good example but the mister splashy pants on reddit incident was really cool and funny. Here's a ted talk about it: http://www.ted.com/talks/alexis_ohanian_how_to_make_a_splash_in_social_media.html http://www.ted.com/talks/alexis_ohanian_how_to_make_a_splash... Most of the people who were part of that probably didn't do anything else but even if 1% bought shirts, that's a net win for Greenpeace. You don't need everyone to make an impact. Same with the facebook groups, even if only 1% are hardcore activists, it's better than 0. I'm sure there are other cool examples.
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
david2777 16y ago
What makes this NSFW?
- chrisbroadfoot 16y ago
  Maybe because the article is so boring and irrelevant to anyone's daily work? But seriously, is this just a link-bait title because the author gets paid per page impressions?!
  - kyro 16y ago
    No. It's just a tag he uses to label his weekend pieces.
    - mahmud 16y ago
      The marketer in me thinks the tag actually gets better click-through than untagged (SFW) articles. A bit "meta" and ironic, like how certain rock bands used to call themselves suggestive names to lure people into venues.
    - deleted 16y ago
      [deleted]
- thomasswift 16y ago
  I think most Paul Carr articles on techcrunch usually start out "NSFW:" mainly because most of the time they are, this just happen to be on the lighter side of things.
- thejo 16y ago
  NSFW is the name of the weekly column by Paul Carr.
- edanm 16y ago
  NSFW is the name of Paul Carr's column. It's meaning is not that the contents are not safe for work - it means that Paul Carr himself is "not safe for work", having been fired from every job he's ever had. Amazes me that on every single one of his articles, the top-voted comment is always "why is this NSFW????" By the way, if you haven't read it, Paul Carr's book is really quite excellent, especially for budding entrepreneurs; I highly recommend you check it out.
JJMalina 16y ago
I think everyone is missing the point here about using Twitter to form strong ties or cause tangible social change. Are people working for Greenpeace or some other org on the streets of NYC harassing people actually more effective than tweeting or liking a cause? Tweets for causes definitely aren't as annoying, unlike these people who pester you every time you pass them by. If anything they're making you less inclined to support some kind of cause.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
_delirium 16y ago
Dixon's claim that he's made strong ties through Twitter is interesting. I haven't heard that before, even from people who use Twitter frequently (I use it quite frequently too). I definitely believe that people can form strong ties electronically, and I've done so on BBSs, IRC, forums, even mailing lists. I've never thought of Twitter as a place for that, though; its conversations are just too short and disjointed for me to feel much in the way of personal connection.
- jeffmiller 16y ago
  I've formed some strong ties through Twitter, but as with Dixon's experience, they only begin on Twitter--they don't evolve there. Conversations quickly move to email, Skype and IRL.
  - petercooper 16y ago
    Ditto, though I'd say only about half of mine "move" elsewhere and the other half do evolve on Twitter alone. I follow about 900 people and frequently go through this list. At least half are people I now "know" through Twitter and identify with and know a little about. Many of them frequently help me out online, promote my projects, give me feedback, etc. This is very valuable to me. But I'm a cave dweller who hardly goes out and I've been on Twitter since 2006 and use Twitter very proactively. I certainly sympathize with people who can't make it stick, though, because it almost takes being quite antisocial IRL to make putting the effort in worth it..
- nkassis 16y ago
  I've seen such things on HN at least. I've been contacted after posts I've made here and there are tons of people who received good help after asking for it on HN. I don't think Dixon's is talking about the same thing as Gladwell. The examples that Gladwell cites are large movements not business or personal connections.
bobz 16y ago
So, the point is, it's not Twitter that matters, but the connection of the humans behind Twitter? How is this news? Does anyone argue that a telephone is responsible for major social good?
- pacomerh 16y ago
  Yes, I agree with you. And from now on we're gonna remind ourselves of the very basics of being human, because we forgot how to do it. Now I see tons of books on how to be simple again, and how you should use pen and paper to write your ideas rather than a computer..., oh and how to avoid getting distracted from the info clutter that surrounds us. This is what is happening now, talking about being human again. Maybe i'm going too far but yeah nothing new man
kyro 16y ago
Yeah, I totally agree with Gladwell on this one. I'll go even one step further and claim that many to most of the people you see joining these Facebook charity groups do so almost involuntarily because their friends do. I was so irritated by this when the Save Darfur groups started gaining traction, that I created my own bogus group with the premise that we should recycle garbage and feed all the rotten thrown-out foods that supermarkets discard to African orphans. Within days I got several thousand members with some commenting about how great the cause was. I even threw in some really bogus stats, like 30 orphans die in the time it takes you to exhale. Morbid prank, I know, but it was an experiment that proved to me that most on Facebook don't give a damn about causes and join these groups for purely narcissistic reasons.
- aaronbrethorst 16y ago
  I must say, I think this is the first time I've ever agreed with Malcolm Gladwell on, well, anything.
- jgrahamc 16y ago
  I realize it's a bit "me too", but having used Twitter and other social media during the Turing apology campaign I too agree with Gladwell. Twitter's great for getting a message out, but I don't think it's going to change the world. However, that doesn't mean you shouldn't use it. It's a very valuable addition to the arsenal. Pity Gladwell doesn't use his Twitter account.
maxklein 16y ago
I agree. This sterile electronic communication is very fickle - people will be there, then suddenly not. I've found that something like twitter is very poor in building any kind of proper relationship, as mostly it's about people who want something from the other person. One could say that twitter is good as a way of introducing people, but I most certainly could not identify enough with the people in any twitter or facebook collection to join in a battle with them. Let's say it were the 40s and we made a facebook group called "resistance against the german occupation forces". Now, we all have the same interest in mind, but if we actually meet together, it's very likely there will be varying levels or intensity, varying agendas, varying personalities. We could not form an effective resistance group. If, however, I would do this with my existing friends, we would have a cohesive and trustworthy group with which we could organise things and make things happen. Offline inviting of people to the group would go through a kind of vetting process where you actually get to see the whole of the person, and not just a single sterile attribute like "dislikes the occupation." My experience with twitter and other boards is that the relationship you think you are building is very weak and fleeting. Most of the time, it's based on what one person wants from the other - for example, entertainment, connections, money, information. It's not based on shared interests or the ability to connect on a more fundamental level.
- aaronbrethorst 16y ago
  Relationships built solely on Twitter, Facebook and the like may well be fleeting, but I have found them to be very effective tools for reinforcing and extending existing, meaningful relationships: My sister doing public health work in Africa shares her photos on Facebook and Flickr. My married friends doing research in China: status updates on Facebook. My scattered high school and college friends: all on Facebook. My 'In Real Life' software developer friends: all on Twitter. I have too few opportunities to see all of them, so being able to connect on Twitter and share the occasional note is extremely valuable.
Tichy 16y ago
I think most demonstrations are there to make the demonstrators feel better. So changing your Twitter avatar can make you feel better - it works just like the real demonstration? Except that if you go to a real demonstration, maybe you can make some real friends. You don't actually meet anybody by changing your Twitter icon. But that is another side effect - the original "I want to do something" works both on Twitter and on the street.
AndyKelley 16y ago
Does anyone else have a problem with those numbers at the end? 1282339 * 0.09 + 22073 * 0.35 + 2797 * 0.15 = $123,555.61 That's pretty impressive IMHO.

57 points by OoTheNigerian 16y ago

The question isn't whether or not social media activism is a powerful replacement for "real life" activism. The question is whether or not the people participating in social media activism would be doing anything at all if it weren't so easy to participate. Did the activist marching on Washington retreat to his desk, or did the couch potato join the movement? I don't know the answer, but the difference is an important one.

maeon3 16y ago

What about the scientology protests? I think there was an element of social media fueling that fire.

lsc 16y ago
really? 4chan as an example of the positive power of social media? heh.

nkassis 16y ago

I don't know if it's a good example but the mister splashy pants on reddit incident was really cool and funny. Here's a ted talk about it: http://www.ted.com/talks/alexis_ohanian_how_to_make_a_splash_in_social_media.html http://www.ted.com/talks/alexis_ohanian_how_to_make_a_splash... Most of the people who were part of that probably didn't do anything else but even if 1% bought shirts, that's a net win for Greenpeace. You don't need everyone to make an impact. Same with the facebook groups, even if only 1% are hardcore activists, it's better than 0. I'm sure there are other cool examples.

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]

david2777 16y ago

What makes this NSFW?

chrisbroadfoot 16y ago
Maybe because the article is so boring and irrelevant to anyone's daily work? But seriously, is this just a link-bait title because the author gets paid per page impressions?!
- kyro 16y ago
  No. It's just a tag he uses to label his weekend pieces.
  - mahmud 16y ago
    The marketer in me thinks the tag actually gets better click-through than untagged (SFW) articles. A bit "meta" and ironic, like how certain rock bands used to call themselves suggestive names to lure people into venues.
  - deleted 16y ago
    [deleted]
thomasswift 16y ago
I think most Paul Carr articles on techcrunch usually start out "NSFW:" mainly because most of the time they are, this just happen to be on the lighter side of things.
thejo 16y ago
NSFW is the name of the weekly column by Paul Carr.
edanm 16y ago
NSFW is the name of Paul Carr's column. It's meaning is not that the contents are not safe for work - it means that Paul Carr himself is "not safe for work", having been fired from every job he's ever had. Amazes me that on every single one of his articles, the top-voted comment is always "why is this NSFW????" By the way, if you haven't read it, Paul Carr's book is really quite excellent, especially for budding entrepreneurs; I highly recommend you check it out.

JJMalina 16y ago

I think everyone is missing the point here about using Twitter to form strong ties or cause tangible social change. Are people working for Greenpeace or some other org on the streets of NYC harassing people actually more effective than tweeting or liking a cause? Tweets for causes definitely aren't as annoying, unlike these people who pester you every time you pass them by. If anything they're making you less inclined to support some kind of cause.

deleted 16y ago
[deleted]

_delirium 16y ago

Dixon's claim that he's made strong ties through Twitter is interesting. I haven't heard that before, even from people who use Twitter frequently (I use it quite frequently too). I definitely believe that people can form strong ties electronically, and I've done so on BBSs, IRC, forums, even mailing lists. I've never thought of Twitter as a place for that, though; its conversations are just too short and disjointed for me to feel much in the way of personal connection.

jeffmiller 16y ago
I've formed some strong ties through Twitter, but as with Dixon's experience, they only begin on Twitter--they don't evolve there. Conversations quickly move to email, Skype and IRL.
- petercooper 16y ago
  Ditto, though I'd say only about half of mine "move" elsewhere and the other half do evolve on Twitter alone. I follow about 900 people and frequently go through this list. At least half are people I now "know" through Twitter and identify with and know a little about. Many of them frequently help me out online, promote my projects, give me feedback, etc. This is very valuable to me. But I'm a cave dweller who hardly goes out and I've been on Twitter since 2006 and use Twitter very proactively. I certainly sympathize with people who can't make it stick, though, because it almost takes being quite antisocial IRL to make putting the effort in worth it..
nkassis 16y ago
I've seen such things on HN at least. I've been contacted after posts I've made here and there are tons of people who received good help after asking for it on HN. I don't think Dixon's is talking about the same thing as Gladwell. The examples that Gladwell cites are large movements not business or personal connections.

bobz 16y ago

So, the point is, it's not Twitter that matters, but the connection of the humans behind Twitter? How is this news? Does anyone argue that a telephone is responsible for major social good?

pacomerh 16y ago
Yes, I agree with you. And from now on we're gonna remind ourselves of the very basics of being human, because we forgot how to do it. Now I see tons of books on how to be simple again, and how you should use pen and paper to write your ideas rather than a computer..., oh and how to avoid getting distracted from the info clutter that surrounds us. This is what is happening now, talking about being human again. Maybe i'm going too far but yeah nothing new man

kyro 16y ago

Yeah, I totally agree with Gladwell on this one. I'll go even one step further and claim that many to most of the people you see joining these Facebook charity groups do so almost involuntarily because their friends do. I was so irritated by this when the Save Darfur groups started gaining traction, that I created my own bogus group with the premise that we should recycle garbage and feed all the rotten thrown-out foods that supermarkets discard to African orphans. Within days I got several thousand members with some commenting about how great the cause was. I even threw in some really bogus stats, like 30 orphans die in the time it takes you to exhale. Morbid prank, I know, but it was an experiment that proved to me that most on Facebook don't give a damn about causes and join these groups for purely narcissistic reasons.

aaronbrethorst 16y ago
I must say, I think this is the first time I've ever agreed with Malcolm Gladwell on, well, anything.
jgrahamc 16y ago
I realize it's a bit "me too", but having used Twitter and other social media during the Turing apology campaign I too agree with Gladwell. Twitter's great for getting a message out, but I don't think it's going to change the world. However, that doesn't mean you shouldn't use it. It's a very valuable addition to the arsenal. Pity Gladwell doesn't use his Twitter account.

maxklein 16y ago

I agree. This sterile electronic communication is very fickle - people will be there, then suddenly not. I've found that something like twitter is very poor in building any kind of proper relationship, as mostly it's about people who want something from the other person. One could say that twitter is good as a way of introducing people, but I most certainly could not identify enough with the people in any twitter or facebook collection to join in a battle with them. Let's say it were the 40s and we made a facebook group called "resistance against the german occupation forces". Now, we all have the same interest in mind, but if we actually meet together, it's very likely there will be varying levels or intensity, varying agendas, varying personalities. We could not form an effective resistance group. If, however, I would do this with my existing friends, we would have a cohesive and trustworthy group with which we could organise things and make things happen. Offline inviting of people to the group would go through a kind of vetting process where you actually get to see the whole of the person, and not just a single sterile attribute like "dislikes the occupation." My experience with twitter and other boards is that the relationship you think you are building is very weak and fleeting. Most of the time, it's based on what one person wants from the other - for example, entertainment, connections, money, information. It's not based on shared interests or the ability to connect on a more fundamental level.

aaronbrethorst 16y ago
Relationships built solely on Twitter, Facebook and the like may well be fleeting, but I have found them to be very effective tools for reinforcing and extending existing, meaningful relationships: My sister doing public health work in Africa shares her photos on Facebook and Flickr. My married friends doing research in China: status updates on Facebook. My scattered high school and college friends: all on Facebook. My 'In Real Life' software developer friends: all on Twitter. I have too few opportunities to see all of them, so being able to connect on Twitter and share the occasional note is extremely valuable.

Tichy 16y ago

I think most demonstrations are there to make the demonstrators feel better. So changing your Twitter avatar can make you feel better - it works just like the real demonstration? Except that if you go to a real demonstration, maybe you can make some real friends. You don't actually meet anybody by changing your Twitter icon. But that is another side effect - the original "I want to do something" works both on Twitter and on the street.

AndyKelley 16y ago

Does anyone else have a problem with those numbers at the end? 1282339 * 0.09 + 22073 * 0.35 + 2797 * 0.15 = $123,555.61 That's pretty impressive IMHO.