So maybe you don't do Twitter. Maybe it all seems rather silly to you: all the symbols and abbreviations and hash-tags, and especially the arbitrary 140-character length of a tweet. Before I began micro-blogging, I too was bothered by its lingo and limitations. But I’ve found a lot can be communicated within those restraints. Which brings me to my story.
After reading an insightful (and frightening) post by James Pethokoukis, Reuter's money and politics blogger, about why America's unemployment rate may surpass 12% (summary: it's a lagging indicator and GDP just moved into the black this quarter), I decided to follow him on Twitter.
I soon discovered that Pethokoukis's politics are more conservative than mine, but this isn't necessarily a problem. If only there were more thoughtful Republicans and fewer teabaggers polluting American political discourse with their death panels and socialism scaremongering. But I was rather surprised to see him tweet his endorsement of one such scaremongerer:
I will let Team Sarah argue the pro-Palin position, but I think she has potential and mega-upside as a candidate
Like many Americas outside the Bible Belt, I was aghast when John McCain picked Sarah Palin, a first-term governor of Alaska, to be his running mate. Shortly after the her appointment,
The Economist's
Lexington columnist noted that McCain’s decision to pick an “inexperienced and Bush-level incurious” running mate raised “more general worries about the Republican Party’s fitness for government.” Pethokoukis’s support for a hypothetical Palin 2012 presidential campaign raised similar questions about his fitness for political blogging. I decided to stop following his Twitter feed and thought I’d let my followers know why:
Why I no longer follow Reuter's @JimPethokoukis: "I think [Sarah Palin] has potential and mega-upside as a candidate."
Generally, that’s where the story ends in the
Twitterverse. Someone says something you like or don’t like, and you retweet it—perhaps with some added value commentary if you’ve got a few characters to spare. Maybe someone retweets your retweet, but, more likely, it dies there like a sentence shouted into the vast darkness of cyberspace. Which is why I was so surprised when Pethokoukis responded to my announcement:
@CorbinHiar How can I win you back? Advocacy of a 90% tax rate? Detente with Al-Qaeda? I know there's a way ...
This is a story about the gift and the curse of Twitter. In 140 characters there isn’t room for me to elaborate on the many reasons I am certain Sarah Palin would make a very bad president. Nor is there any better way for Pethokoukis to respond to my public decision to stop following him than with overstated humour. Twitter is a
poor venue for any proper discussion of the issues, but it’s a great place to
share quick insights. And, as Pethokoukis made clear, 140 characters are plenty enough to make a joke.
Picture credit: petesimon (via Flickr)
Email this page
Delicious
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Comments
I agree that Twitter is a
November 18, 2009 - 16:09 — Kristoffer (not verified)I agree that Twitter is a great way to share quick insights. Unfortunately I think they really need to address the problem they have with spam. I have to delete half of my followers because of spam and I'm not "checking in" on Twitter as much as I use to because of it.
Post new comment