[Air-L] Trivial tweeting

[Nishant Shah]

Hi Bernie and everyone,
I think what interests me most about this particular post is the pattern I
see emerging in 'concerns' around new technologies that either upscale quite
well or go 'mainstream'. About six years ago, when I was at the beginning of
my PhD research, and in the midst of a huge growth in blogging, similar
questions were posited then:
1. Why do people write about their inane and mundane lives? We are not
talking about the more popular or celebrity bloggers, who, are popular or
visible because they are an exception rather than the rule.
2. More significantly, who are the people responding to these 'trivial' or
'useless' information that is being published?
3. What is the relationship between the blog, the blogger and the
participating audience that manages to carry the momentum so that the
dynamics are perpetuated?

I don't think there are many resolutions or explainations that might answer
these questions satisfactorily - or in other words, each theory is as
plausible as the other, and at the end of the day, just that. A theory. It
is interesting to see how the concerns and questions which were once pinned
on blogging are leap-frogging on to twitter now. This constant extension of
certain concerns and expectations from one technology on to another,
interests me quite a lot. On the one hand, this becomes the driving point of
innovation and experimentation as we seek 'better' and more 'efficient'
technologies which will eventually resolve the concerns and on the other,
the existing technologies themselves seek to expand their usage, scope and
potential in a bid to survive in the ruthless technology markets of
consuption.

I was particularly struck by the idea of exhibitionism and the use of sexual
metaphors in trying to understand twitter (and other micro blogging
networks) because Once Upon a Time, I had started an inquiry into the whole
nature of pleasure-blogging-pornography, which I have published in parts but
am still trying to figure out. (E-copy of the paper available at
http://cis-india.org/publications/cis-publications/nishant-shahs-publications)


I don't really have immediate answers to these questions, and I am reluctant
to pick a box, but I do think that the conversation is getting very
interesting, and it is fascinating how the questions which had more or less
died with every mainstream media house starting a blog, have resurfaced with
twitter.

I will write soon if I have more to say. But thanks a lot Bernie, for
starting up a very interesting discussion.

Warmly
Nishant

On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 7:58 PM, Bernie Hogan <bernie.hogan at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear Aoir folk,
>
> I had a Morton's thai chicken sandwich for lunch. Delicious.
>
> Pretty trivial, eh? So why do people do it? I can understand
> retweeting 'important' or novel things: it is obviously a practice for
> garnering attention (see danah, Scott and Gilad's new DRAFT:
> http://www.zephoria.org/thoughts/archives/2009/06/18/understanding_r.html
> ). But why do people tweet what appears to be trivial statements?
>
> In the process of norm formation on twitter, I have been privy to more
> than a few conversations where the most common complaint about twitter
> is that twitter is for people who want to show off everything they're
> doing and, "I don't care what they had for lunch"; they are being
> exhibitionistic (which is a veiled term for unwanted self-exposure).
>
> Any thoughts? Here's some ideas:
> 1. People do not know what constitutes 'interesting' and they are
> trying. (The spaghetti on the wall hypothesis - throw it all and see
> what sticks)
> 2. People genuinely believe they are promoting something.
> 3. People want to make themselves accessible - mundane twitters help
> signify a sense of "connected presence".
>
> Also, have you followed anyone who was a trivial twitter, but
> ultimately stopped tweeting everything? Have you been privy to a
> norm-reevaluation (i.e. someone complaining about a tweeter that led
> to a change in the tweeter's behavior?). Did you tweet everything and
> then give up because it led to more bad press than good press? Was
> there an audience feedback in there, for example, people stopped
> following me until I started posting 'serious' things, like
> discussions about twitter, then it picked up?
>
> Take care,
> BERNiE (@blurky)
>
> Bernie Hogan
> Research Fellow, Oxford Internet Institute
> University of Oxford
> _______________________________________________
> The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list
> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org
> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at:
> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
>
> Join the Association of Internet Researchers:
> http://www.aoir.org/
>



-- 
Nishant Shah
Doctoral Candidate, CSCS, Bangalore.
Director (Research), Centre for Internet and Society,( www.cis-india.org )
Asia Awards Fellow, 2008-09
# 00-86-21-66130376