2 ms·

Everyone I talked to who worked at or joined Twitter early on talks about how they felt like they were part of a global conversation but it was always really pu

Everyone I talked to who worked at or joined Twitter early on talks about how they felt like they were part of a global conversation but it was always really puzzling to me. I read Twitter occasionally in the early days but most of my friends were on IRC or GChat, with a lot being offline, and my networks migrated but never got onto Twitter. Twitter never really felt that relevant to me and over time it felt like it only got more not less insular. I lurked on it the way I lurked on tons of IRC channels. Once IRC began to fade, early Reddit (from the founding) was where I found the community I was looking for. My feeling as an outsider is that Twitter was useful and valuable ("high engagement") for the folks who enjoyed the culture that built up on the platform, but for everyone else it was always a bit insular and self-important. Since Twitter's founding, more and more online communities and spaces have sprung up, so if Twitter does indeed decline in usage its regulars will diffuse into the many other alternatives that have sprung up. That's my $0.02 at least as someone who's watched from the sidelines for a couple decades.

wpietri 4y ago
I mean, every platform develops its culture and attracts the people who enjoy that culture. If it's not for you, nothing wrong with that. But I think "insular" is a funny word to use here, in that it being one giant space meant that self-segregation was a much harder choice to make than on, say, HN or a given subreddit. The thing that always kept me using it was the great variety of voices there. Some of my favorite people to follow were not the ones saying much, but the ones with excellent editorial judgment about who to retweet, exposing me to so many different perspectives.
- Karrot_Kream 4y ago
  Twitter is indeed a place with a lot of interests and topics but after the initial period it built up a pretty unique culture. As you say, it's just an aspect of platforms. But there was something unique about how Twitter folks really felt like their network was the "global conversation" that I never felt elsewhere, even though it felt just as self-selecting as the other networks. Early Reddit definitely attracted a pretty interesting, insular bunch but there was never any feeling that Redditors were creating a similar global network. I was on IRC channels that had Americans, Europeans, Indians, Singaporeans, and Hong Kongers but we all knew we were weird. There was always something unique about Twitter users that made them think of their space as a global village, and I think the large presence of journalists and MSM friendliness was a big part of that. Twitter also managed to create a product that its sticky users loved in a way that I'm not sure any other network managed. Redditors loved Reddit but not nearly as much as Twitter users liked Twitter. Whatever it was I hope product folks study it closely.
  - wpietri 4y ago
    Sorry, I'm not getting what you're not getting. IRC channels and subreddits are defined around special interests. There is a thing that unifies people. Sometimes that topic can have a well-distributed membership, but there is always a selection bias that comes from the chosen topic bias. Twitter is unique in that it had both wide international reach and no topic structure. Reddit is an engine for shutting you off from 99.9% of the Reddit discussion. Twitter, for better and for worse, didn't and couldn't do that. As you say, the journalists were definitely part of that. To the extent a global conversation existed previously, it was among journalists and the people they covered, like major politicians, NGO heads, and the like. Twitter expanded and disintermediated that. Suddenly you could hear from all those media subjects directly. And even more unusually, you could try to join in, speaking directly to people previously unreachable, maybe even getting replies. One major motivator for people joining Twitter was exactly that, as the Waiting for Bieber art piece demonstrated: https://www.trendhunter.com/trends/waiting-for-bieber https://www.trendhunter.com/trends/waiting-for-bieber The only platform with anything like that reach was email. And although email has global reach, it isn't a global stage like Twitter was. No other platform has that, and I doubt one ever will.
maegul 4y ago
I’m with you on this. I suspect with hindsight the Twitter story will have “self importance” and traditional cultural factors like journalism and political institutional buy-in as major factors behind its apparent significance. Its friendliness mainstream media and news, where it was perfect for news that hashtag trending could be monitored. Did any other platform ever get so much attention from mainstream media?

wpietri 4y ago

I mean, every platform develops its culture and attracts the people who enjoy that culture. If it's not for you, nothing wrong with that. But I think "insular" is a funny word to use here, in that it being one giant space meant that self-segregation was a much harder choice to make than on, say, HN or a given subreddit. The thing that always kept me using it was the great variety of voices there. Some of my favorite people to follow were not the ones saying much, but the ones with excellent editorial judgment about who to retweet, exposing me to so many different perspectives.

Karrot_Kream 4y ago
Twitter is indeed a place with a lot of interests and topics but after the initial period it built up a pretty unique culture. As you say, it's just an aspect of platforms. But there was something unique about how Twitter folks really felt like their network was the "global conversation" that I never felt elsewhere, even though it felt just as self-selecting as the other networks. Early Reddit definitely attracted a pretty interesting, insular bunch but there was never any feeling that Redditors were creating a similar global network. I was on IRC channels that had Americans, Europeans, Indians, Singaporeans, and Hong Kongers but we all knew we were weird. There was always something unique about Twitter users that made them think of their space as a global village, and I think the large presence of journalists and MSM friendliness was a big part of that. Twitter also managed to create a product that its sticky users loved in a way that I'm not sure any other network managed. Redditors loved Reddit but not nearly as much as Twitter users liked Twitter. Whatever it was I hope product folks study it closely.
- wpietri 4y ago
  Sorry, I'm not getting what you're not getting. IRC channels and subreddits are defined around special interests. There is a thing that unifies people. Sometimes that topic can have a well-distributed membership, but there is always a selection bias that comes from the chosen topic bias. Twitter is unique in that it had both wide international reach and no topic structure. Reddit is an engine for shutting you off from 99.9% of the Reddit discussion. Twitter, for better and for worse, didn't and couldn't do that. As you say, the journalists were definitely part of that. To the extent a global conversation existed previously, it was among journalists and the people they covered, like major politicians, NGO heads, and the like. Twitter expanded and disintermediated that. Suddenly you could hear from all those media subjects directly. And even more unusually, you could try to join in, speaking directly to people previously unreachable, maybe even getting replies. One major motivator for people joining Twitter was exactly that, as the Waiting for Bieber art piece demonstrated: https://www.trendhunter.com/trends/waiting-for-bieber https://www.trendhunter.com/trends/waiting-for-bieber The only platform with anything like that reach was email. And although email has global reach, it isn't a global stage like Twitter was. No other platform has that, and I doubt one ever will.

maegul 4y ago

I’m with you on this. I suspect with hindsight the Twitter story will have “self importance” and traditional cultural factors like journalism and political institutional buy-in as major factors behind its apparent significance. Its friendliness mainstream media and news, where it was perfect for news that hashtag trending could be monitored. Did any other platform ever get so much attention from mainstream media?