JCC Why does twitter suck so much ?

I've had likes from, and conversations with, dozens of famous people on Twitter. Most of them are pretty approachable.

I don't follow many of them these days, as most of them don't have a lot to say that I'm going to find interesting; so I use Twitter more for private chats with a few ex-boards members who are now friends, and to follow news outlets, authors and scientists, mainly.

 

It’s something I’m not proud of about myself.

I usually use Instagram and Facebook as conventional social media while my Twitter is more about fandom and stanning. I value both in different ways, but I am much less active on Twitter nowadays.

 

I see absolutely no reason why you can't do that, personally.

 

It’s because you don’t retweet me often enough

 

I think with Twitter it’s not anonymity, as most are not anonymous there at all, but there is (as with all online interactions) something about distance from the people you’re speaking to that lends itself to a complete breakdown of civility. 95% of the **** people say to each other on Twitter would never be said to their faces. But this was also partly the dynamic that has driven revolutions in the past. Many of the people doing the attempted overthrowing of those in power could never interact with those people in person. So being uncivil to them was easier. Twitter is uncivil because the people on it don’t have to see each other every day for lunch. Even I’m a lot nicer in person.

This is a basic, and uninteresting point that is not specific to Twitter. But when you factor in the amount of time people spend interacting online, the effect on general civility can be massive.

This can be a very good thing if used to help bring down authoritarian systems, as during the Arab Spring. But it can also be used to erode democratic systems and general humane behavior.

I personally feel that Twitter was a tool that could be used for social progress…about ten years ago, when the platform was a central tool for bringing down Mubarak. But now it’s largely negative and I hope it dies.

 

You want to get noticed by Taylor Swift, don’t you?

 

Even with all the bull****, to say the least, I still find enough enjoyment on Twitter, because it's still a great source for in-the-moment reactions for sporting events; also post/in-season snark if things aren't going well for particular teams. Political snark, too, to a point.

 

Snark. The most overrated form of humor. And I say that as someone who’s guilt of it, from time to time…

 

Twitter has done some good, the ability for stories to "trend" because of the hashtag system has allowed many people who feel as though they don't have a strong enough voice to speak out.
The #MeToo movement is a good example

It's also an example of how reactionary and hostile such a platform can be.

I do think some of it boils down to the limited character count and inability to edit something after you've posted it. Some people struggle to communicate what they want to say effectively in so few words which could lead to long thread posts that many people will likely ignore because it's too much to read.

But also because a vocal angry minority can easily overwhelm other people and shut down any attempt at proper discussion. Though that's trypical with pretty much all social media, not just Twitter.

 

Among the things I hate the most, there is the hot-take twitter subculture, and also this repetitive use of trending words and expressions.

For example, if they like something, they're not going to look for an accurate word to describe what's good about it, they're just going to say it's underrated. Underrated by whom ?? With respect to what ?? Everyone saying "underrated".
Actually, they don't just say underrated, they say "criminally underrated". Apparently someone used this expression once and the world decided it's the coolest word combo you could possibly make.

 

I can't help feel that a lot of this depends on whom you follow. The highly contentious stuff is less frequent on my feed these days because I quickly root out the crap, by unfollowing and blocking. I recently unfollowed Extinction Rebellion, whom I have been increasingly critical of, for a number of reasons, even if I sympathise with them, in part. They don't represent the Global South, amongst other things. Bizarrely, they don't seem to understand ecology very well, either. Now, they only occasionally pop up in my feed if liked or retweeted by someone else I follow, or who follows me. I can choose to ignore the content, and that's fine.

The platform is undoubtedly problematic in political posting, due in part to bots pushing an agenda, but also to numerous loons; but if that stuff really bothers you, then follow people who post pics of kittens and knitting. The platform caters to completely innocuous stuff as well. Twitter isn't just all base arguments and opinion-setting soundbites.

Twitter still provides me with valuable links to news items and the latest research, which I can choose to follow up or not. It also provides me with valuable links to environmental groups where I have made a lot of useful contacts; likewise, those who share news on nature conservation, or natural history photography. So, it has its uses.

 

Twitter is the only social media platform I use, not counting this forum (but I don’t think forums count in most definitions). But the key is that it’s not actually “social” at all for me; I don’t tweet, I just use it as a subscribed news feed, and it’s great for that.

 

Just remembered this thread. I used Twitter as described above for quite a few years, but I've recently stopped since there are other options for news that work better now... not to mention that a lot of accounts are not really keeping up with Twitter as much as they used to, and instead just updating their websites and Instagram, etc.

Anyway... Elon Musk has recently bought the largest number of Twitter shares, declined his option of having a seat on the board, and has now made an offer to Twitter to outright buy the rest of the shares and become the 100% owner of the company, which he would then intend to take private. This seems less than ideal, especially since he's vowed to "fix" the issues that Twitter has with "free speech". Free speech as defined by him as the sole owner of a private company, who would benefit from controlling the dialogue around his companies and his desire to pay less taxes? A possibility of letting formerly banned accounts like Trump's to return, with presumably fewer rules in place about misinformation, etc.? Uggh.

 

This is a very interesting thread on the subject from the former Reddit CEO (don't necessarily agree with all of it, but there's some fresh insight)

 

Here's Tina... linking to Twitter

 

I like that tweet because I feel like “I have no idea what I’m talking about (1/83)” is pretty emblematic of the whole site.

 

I think this guy knows what he's talking about, tho

 

And invariably, here's you

 

and... we'll never reach the bottom.

 

No, but it keeps the servers busy.

 

Oh I know this one. Now they engineer market fluctuations with strategic manipulation, eventually forcing Musk to dump all of his stock, and then they sell the company to the benevolent ultra-rich British investor who turns the airline around.

… Wait.

 

You've found the perfect metaphor for Twitter

 

Twitter. The toilet that doesn't flush properly.