3 ms·
Who's going to think of going to a website when under stress when they already have channels they go to and expect to be populated? Convincing people to return
by eropple 3y ago
Who's going to think of going to a website when under stress when they already have channels they go to and expect to be populated?
Convincing people to return to websites for this kind of thing is boiling the ocean.
- damnesian 3y agoCorrect. But I think an app on iOS and Android could certainly do it.
- eropple 3y agoSo we should exclude Blackberry users? Like, tongue in cheek, but until the mad weirdo took over, Twitter was no less effective and open-access readable than an app, while requiring zero engineering effort from organizations that don't have engineering capability.
- ajsnigrutin 3y agoWhat's wrong with a website? If something massive is happening, do you open twitter to look at selfbrags, burger pics, etc., or do you open your local/national newssite (cnn.com, fox.com whatever) to see what happened? Want to see the weather? Will you open a weather site or wait for someone to put the report on twitter? Think you felt an earthquake... twitter? Or national eaqrthquake monitoring site? See a bunch of firefighters... twitter or emergency site?
- eropple 3y ago"What's wrong with a website" is that it is not part of a relevance-curated, pushed feed that people are already using. If you look at pre-idiot-king Twitter, when there's an earthquake it fills up with comments about it, and very rapidly. Geological advisories get retweeted, again very rapidly. It turns out that yeah, this kinda actually works! I am not, I stress, saying that I like that this is the reality of things, but it speaks for itself.