Posts tagged twitter
Weiner denies tweeting the wiener, and there is no proof that the wiener even belongs to Weiner, but if the wiener is not Weiner’s and if Weiner did not tweet the wiener, then to whom does the wiener belong and how did it get tweeted from Weiner’s Twitter account?

Dan Lyons, on the Anthony Weiner twitter photo scandal

This story came through our inbox last night as “roasted weiner.”

(via jessbennett)

Twitter is the framework and not just the picture in the frame (Stealing from famous McLuhan line there).
Twitter CEO @dickc, commenting in response to the New York Times’ Bill Keller’s #TwitterMakesYouStupid thought experiment. The McLuhan line he references goes like this: “It is the framework which changes with each new technology and not just the picture within the frame.” Marshall McLuhan was a smart cookie in the world of media theory.

In Which Romano Profiles Michelle Bachmann, and Reveals His Darkest Fears

The lede from his story "Tweet the Press":

My editor had just stepped into my office to discuss a new assignment. The NEWSWEEK brass is interested in Twitter, he told me, but they’re looking for an original way to cover it—which is where you come in. OK, I thought. Fine. For a youngish reporter like me, this is standard operating procedure. We are expected to understand things like technology, the Internet, and Justin Bieber’s hairstyle. But as my boss got more specific about the sort of story he wanted, I began to worry. “I’m thinking you should write a ‘Twitter profile’ of Michele Bachmann,” he said, referring to the outspoken, ultraconservative Republican congresswoman from Minnesota who has accused Barack Obama of being “anti-American” and asked her supporters to “slit their wrists” and be “blood brothers” to defeat health-care reform. “Fly up there, follow her around, tweet as you go. Then we’ll publish an annotated version of your Twitter feed in the magazine. Could be kind of fun.”

It didn’t sound that way to me. In part I was reluctant because I wasn’t much of a Twitterer at that point, and despite my relatively recent vintage, I didn’t think I could learn the language—ALL those RTs! @s! #s! bit.lys!—in time to pass as a native. Also, I happen to like the old-fashioned way of reporting—with a pen, a pad, and an imaginary fedora perched atop my head. But what really frightened me about the concept of a “NEWSWEEK Twitter profile” was the very real risk of personal and institutional embarrassment that went along with it. Believe it or not, we NEWSWEEKers know what you’re saying about us out there. That we’re obsolete. That all of our remaining subscribers are dentists. That we lose $28 million a year and are about to be sold to an Israeli billionaire who will inevitably replace the entire staff with IDF robots. To me, it seemed like the wrong time to launch an experiment designed to make us look “with it.” “Breaking! From Deathbed, NEWSWEEK Discovers Twitter. Next Up: Bel Biv Devoe.” I was not eager to be eviscerated by the Awl.

Mainstream outlets who gag social media efforts are unilaterally disarming in the ongoing war for reader attention. Reporters and editors would all like to mouth off at will and transgress as we wish, but our online identities are inexorably wrapped up with our professional ones. Every time a reporter hits send, he or she might do the following exercise: How would I feel if my mother and/or my boss read this? Because they well might, along with the legions of folks who sit, like crows on a wire, looking for any wiggle or wobble from media outlets they regard with suspicion in the first place. There will be stumbles and missteps on the way to a hybrid future, but if you can’t trust the women and men who put out your newspaper to use their keyboards wisely regardless of platform, what are they doing working for you?

David Carr, Washington Post to Staff Twitterers: Watch Your Mouth (via soupsoup)

David Carr’s very smart, sensible take on staffers publishing without a net. Honestly, you people would be appalled at what this Tumblr would publish if we thought we could get away with it…

I’ve come to believe that, of all the hellish things that have been spawned in the fever swamp that is the Internet, Twitter may turn out to be the most successful of them all—not in spite of its stupidity, but because of it.

Twitter has become a playground for imbeciles, skeevy marketers, D-list celebrity half-wits, and pathetic attention seekers: Shaquille O’Neal, Kim Kardashian, Ryan Seacrest. Sure, some serious people, like George Stephanopoulos and Al Gore, use Twitter. And a lot of publishing companies and bloggers (myself included) use Twitter to send links to articles we’ve published. But most of what streams across Twitter is junk. One recent study concluded that 40 percent of the messages are “pointless babble.”

Then again, look at TV: fat people dancing, talentless people singing, Glenn Beck slinging lunatic conspiracy theories. Stupid stuff sells. The genius of Twitter is that it manages to be even stupider than TV. It’s so stupid that it’s brilliant. No person with an IQ above 100 could possibly care what Ashton Kutcher or Ashlee Simpson has to say about anything. But Kutcher has 3.5 million Twitter followers, and Simpson has 1.5 million. Who are these millions of people? If you’re an investor in Twitter, you probably think, who cares? Kutcher and Simpson might be buffoons, but they’ve built bigger audiences than a lot of TV shows.

Lyons, risking the wrath of Twitterers everywhere.