3 ms·
>> The reason I think "no long term" is that in it's current incarnation it doesn't hold value for "normals" other than people who want to follow celebrities or
by the_watcher 13y ago
>> The reason I think "no long term" is that in it's current incarnation it doesn't hold value for "normals" other than people who want to follow celebrities or of course the tech crowd.
Do you watch CNN? Do you follow breaking news? Then Twitter has demonstrated value for "normals," as it's become the best platform for breaking stories (for better or for worse).
- recuter 13y agoI for one do not watch CNN and don't know anybody who does outside of an Airport or hotel setting.
- the_watcher 13y agoI used CNN as a catch-all for "news." Sub in whatever you use. ESPN, Fox News, NBC, BBC, whatever. All of them use Twitter extensively.
- recuter 13y agoYou are not helping your point.
- the_watcher 13y agoI disagree.
- larrys 13y ago"Do you watch CNN? Do you follow breaking news? Then Twitter has demonstrated value for "normals," Look there are people that watch the nightly news every night. Enough people and enough value to advertisers that there is the nightly news. Forgetting though that that market is declining they have a monetization platform in place (partly by legacy because they were the only source of information so it just lives on) and partly because the format is such (tv commercials) that it provides value for advertisers. The question with twitter is simply how much value can be delivered long term to people that follow (as one example) breaking news. And how much that can be monetized and become a profitable business model. By the way part of CNN is the entertainment value that can keep an audience captivated for hours watching every last minute of storm or conflict or invasion coverage. It's infotainment that drives the bus there and makes the business model work. Highly crafted and entertaining.