4 ms·
I used to think that was the case too, but it’s not universally, it depends on the person. For some people, Twitter’s forced short-form focuses their content,
by SkyMarshal 5y ago
I used to think that was the case too, but it’s not universally, it depends on the person.
For some people, Twitter’s forced short-form focuses their content, cuts out all the bs, and reduces it down to its essence. It prevents them from being overly wordy, and is one of the best available antidotes to modern information overload.
And if the essence of subject is fundamentally nuanced, the twitter discussion still can be too, though it may take multiple tweets to address all of it (a tweet-storm).
If a subject requires long-form, then people tend to write that in a blog post or a paper and link it on twitter, and then discuss whatever aspects of it their followers have questions about.
But again you have to do what the OP article says, and only follow people with shared interests and who meaningfully engage with their followers, and don’t just use Twitter to broadcast stuff without then discussing it (eg accounts with less than 1000 followers).
- photochemsyn 5y agoPerhaps there are some uses that make sense, in terms of weather reports or things like that. However, in terms of "reducing it down to its essence", some propaganda expert (Ivy Lee maybe, or others) of the 1930s said something like this: "Propaganda consists of taking a complex idea, simplifying it down to the point where a small child could understand it, and then repeating, repeating, repeating." Twitter is the ideal platform for that kind of approach, isn't it? I don't think it's healthy for people to spend a lot of time on Twitter for reasons like that.
- SkyMarshal 5y agoSure, but you have to follow the other advice of following people who are 1) subject matter experts and 2) engage with their followers regularly. Propagandists typically aren’t SME’s and don’t engage in discussions with their followers.