If You’re Not on Twitter, You Are Unspeakably Lame
March 10, 2008 2:53 PM
I am in the epicenter of Twitter. And yet I am not Twittering.
Shame on me. I am embarrassed at my lack of early adopter-ness, at my absence of with-it-ness.
I am at the South by Southwest Interactive Festival in Austin, Texas, right now—this is the epicenter of indie Web hipness. Everyone here is Twittering. They Twittered during the keynote Sunday with Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerburg, expressing their displeasure with how the interview was conducted. And they Twitter during the day to tell their “followers” that they’ve added a new video, updated their blog or are now streaming live. That’s how the Twitter-ers get the word out about their online video world.
So here’s the thing. I am on Twitter. But I don’t make such extensive use of it. Should I? Do you want my Twitter updates? Or do you prefer this blog to be unspeakably lame?
Del.icio.us 
Digg 
Fark 
StumbleUpon 
Comments (2)
In a 24/7 news cycle there's no shortage of information, and Twitter may be useful to some as a means of distributing even more raw "content." But those of us who rely on you for depth and analysis would, I think, prefer lameness. Twitter if you must, but I'll take reporting over typing.
Posted by Robert Sax | March 10, 2008 5:47 PM
As if blogging weren't self-indulgent enough, now we need to have constant, real-time updates of what people are doing and thinking when they're not blogging? No thank you. You're not lame, Twitter is.
Posted by Bryan | March 11, 2008 8:33 AM