January 25th, 2010 by Steve

Journalist-baiting by Twitter: part two

Following my post about editorial baiting by Twitter a few weeks ago, a few more stereotypes have sprung to mind, padding out the list to 20:

11. Twinfluencer. Thinks journalists will listen to them just because they are a self-professed influential person on Twitter. Digital equivalent of being a PR lass with big norks.

12. Twilliterate. Thinks random streams of consciousness will intrigue hacks, yet tweets make absolutely no sense to anyone. Please learn to write good English before using a computer.

13. Twardy. Always late to pick up on information and pass it on, yet thinks journalists will look kindly upon them just for making the effort. “Hey, seen this about an earthquake in Haiti?”.

14. Tweasure. As in ‘a little treasure’. Just tries to be cutesy and tweet about their commute, TV preferences, lunch and hair in the hope that hacks will find that attractive. Basically just does on Twitter what they do in the real world – flirt outrageously.

15. Twainee. Similar to the above, but uses naivity and “I’m new to Twitter” as excuses for writing silly things and blundering clumsily into conversations while batting digital eyelids.

16. Twy-hard. Thinks that retweeting reports and opinions on the influential power of Twitter and social media measurement will make them look like a guru and journalists will be glued to them because they’re oh-so-clever. Avoid.

17. Twagic. Far too eager to share personal information and mundane snippets of their daily lives in the hope of snaring journalists in conversation. Followed only for their amusement potential.

18. Twoddler. As in ‘talks’ nothing but twoddle. Feels compelled to jump into every conversation on Twitter that catches their eye and is not shy about proffering opinion – much of which is both shallow and moronic.

19. Twirate. Angers easily. Sniffs around Twitter for any journalists voicing their distaste of a product, a place or a person, and then backs them up/further fuels their ire. Typically incapable of holding any other form of conversation.

20. Twinfrequent. Rarely tweets, but when they do, hacks should run for cover. Saves up tweets for a short blast every once in a while. Typically when they have a flimsy news ’story’ that they need to ‘engage the media’ over.

emailAdd to del.icio.usDigg This!Share on FacebookStumble It!
April 30th, 2009 by Steve

In Twitter We Twust: the misinformation pandemic

The spread of swine flu is clearly extremely serious and concerning. Yet so is the extent to which the spread of rumour and innuendo on Twitter seems to send many tweeters into a flap.

Fears of a pandemic are justified, but given some of what I’ve seen going on on Twitter this week, it seems Twitter may be fuelling a level of paranoia unmatched by the mainstream media.

Before the internet was a news and general information source, people would tell each other not to believe everything they read in the papers or hear on the evening news. So why do so many people seem to take every tweet so seriously?

A few clients have talked to me this week about their fears of disinformation spreading quickly on Twitter and how they can help counter false rumours. Given the way the swine flu fears have mushroomed, I can see their point. In time though, I expect people will get a better perspective on the fact that unless later proven by other means, Twitter information can have all the credence (and influence) of a late night conversation in the pub.

It’s time for a dose of reality, and the realisation that with media proliferation comes a need for dependable and trustworthy information sources. Step forward ye destitute publishers bemoaning the shrivelling of the newspaper market and seeking new revenue streams.

Until then, I’ll be twittering and following cautiously.
mask

emailAdd to del.icio.usDigg This!Share on FacebookStumble It!