But this post isn't about rehashing that rather well made point, it's about another interesting incident I found. This morning, I read this article on CNN's website- Ashton Kutcher challenges CNN to Twitter popularity contest.
Now let me be the first to say I laughed at this. Kutcher telling Larry King that if he beats CNN to 1 million Twitter followers he will ding-dong-ditch Ted Turner's house is hilarious. Larry King's response was equally funny, telling Kutcher "CNN will bury you."
Now all kidding aside, it's pretty clear to me that neither Ashton nor CNN understands exactly how Twitter works. If this was a friend race on Myspace, it would make a little more sense. But Twitter is about conversation, not followers. It's not some social cult networking site where whoever recruits the most followers wins.
This kind of thing, especially on this grand and public scale, makes people focus their attention on numbers of followers, not on making actual connections. As I was writing this post, someone retweeted this: TWITTER WAR DECLARED: @someecards (361,733) vs @MarthaStewart (364,507) to 500k. follow someecards and retweet.
I hope that these popularity contests aren't a sign of a new trend to come. Creating buzz about something is good, but creating buzz for buzz's sake leads to a whole lot of nothin.
There is however a redeeming point in Ashton Kutcher's challenge. His original sentiment that a single person can, in today's media, have a voice as big as an entire news station is an interesting and progressive thought. Granted that calling for a popularity contest might not have been the best way to illustrate his point, I still think his idea has merit.
So what do you think? How much value do you put on your number of followers? What do you think of Kutcher's challenge to CNN and (oh what the hell) do you think he can beat CNN?
Preston you make a great point. I think Twitter is more of a personal social networking website. Yes it's pretty cool to follow celebs but since twitter is for conversation it is not likely that celebs will follow you back or start up a convo. Ellen also did the same thing. Yes it is great that more and more people are signing up for twitter but I know I will only follow people I know and want to hear their thoughts. Facebook is the site to friend everyone not twitter.
ReplyDeleteTwitter has been an outstanding outlet for me to make REAL connections. When I first joined up I thought 'I'll never really get a lot out of this' but I have - the bonds I've made with many like-minded individuals in invaluable. I love how 140 characters can bring people together and get people (really) talking. To me, my number of followers holds no merit - I would rather have a small number of quality followers than a large number of random folks. That being said - I am always willing and wanting to expand my reach and audience, so I continue to reach out and continue to grow within my social networking communities. Being popular is great if the right people are the one's who support you.
ReplyDeleteGreat thoughts - and I think Kutcher has got this on in the bag...as sad as it is (no, I'm not following either FYI)
I think the number of followers is very important.......in a totally opposite way that these "celebs" consider it.
ReplyDeleteI NEED to have few followers. It's exactly because of that approach that I've been able to seriously connect with some awesome people.
Also, and i think is the most important thing to get from this story, Kutcher and CNN can have this silly little contest because there are no less than ONE MILLION people willing to participate.
I'm not saying what people should do or stop doing, but maybe that's what Twitter is all about, and us "connectors" are the ones who don't get it. I'm totally fine with that BTW.
Cool post man, and i agree with Jun, switch to WP.
Thanks for the comments so far folks!
ReplyDelete@matthew I agree with you on how 140 characters can spark really good connections. When people say "Isn't twitter just like facebook status? Why would I do that?" I cringe. I agree with your approach to the quantity of followers also- over the last month I've gotten maybe a dozen or 2 dozen new followers, but in the last week or so, I've made at least 3 or 4 quality connections that I wouldn't trade for 3 or 4 dozen random follows.
@carlos You make a cool introverted point. If the majority of twitter users just follow and are followed to be popular and show their numbers, are we the "not normal" ones using twitter incorrectly? Trying to take a silly 140 status update site and making more out of it than there's suppose to be. Then I'm okay with that also.
I do use Wordpress for another blog, and I'm considering switching this one over to that now. Hrm.
Interesting thoughts.
ReplyDeleteIs Twitter a popularity contest? Just like anything else in this world, once something hits "the masses," it will be forever changed and popular celebrities will rule supreme. One the masses take over, you'll begin to see more and more spam, people will start competing over who has the most followers (looks like it's already happened), and the early adopters will look for the next big thing.
Hey, this is good for Twitter right? More press.
But what does this mean for us? To be honest, it really doesn't affect us in any way. We can still build our community, while the masses follow everyone in site. We can talk to our friends, while companies try to @ or DM us and fail.
Sites come and go, and Twitter will reach a point when it has been adopted by the masses. Once it hits this point, it'll probably lose a lot of its appeal for me.
I've already started using Facebook less and less...
@Jun Good point about once a social media site falls into the hands of "the masses" there being more spam- immediately thought of Myspace. Spam on Facebook is already starting to creep in via those stupid "choose your top 5" or "what is you true ______ personality" quizzes.
ReplyDeleteI hope no matter how popularized twitter gets that we can, like you said, keep building community, and that Twitter doesn't meet the same abandonment as other social networking sites. I think if anything, @ spams could eventually be a killing factor for twitter.
"But Twitter is about conversation, not followers"
ReplyDeletePrecisely. And I've kind of given my opinion on this before, but I really do believe that Twitter is about the conversation, the sharing of information and of ourselves so that we may connect with another human being. Sometimes that connection is through a shared hobby; sometimes it's through a familiar insight. Sometimes it's just about appreciating another's words.
I really do believe that Twitter is what you make of it. I'm so proud of my community because there are such good, warm, open, and intelligent people there who are willing to share a part of themselves and forge those connections. In that aspect, Twitter isn't about numbers, but about relations.
I think with celebrities, it's a different game, however. For them it might be more about their fanbase, a giving their fans or followers a more intimate look into their lives. Of course it's a popularity game then because that's what the industry is about. It's a shame, but it's true. I see something interesting happening because of Twitter with "celebrities," though...That barrier seems to be breaking down, despite the ratio of following to follower. If you take a look, Ashton Kutcher does @reply people. So maybe they are working on getting it right; maybe they're just on a different scale.
I'd be interested to see how this plays out down the road as Twitter becomes more mainstream. Nice post!
@Susan-
ReplyDeleteThanks for insightful comment. I do think Twitter will change when it becomes more mainstream, and more and more I think this will be because of celebs. Oprah made a Twitter, and the same day, 2 million new Twitter accounts were created. Like I also said before, I think dedicated people willing to connect will still use it in the same way, as long as it doesn't become a medium for massive spam. (what I consider to be a major killer for Myspace, beside FB of course)