Against all my instincts, I’ve joined Twitter. In my defense
let me say I only did it because I was forced into it. I was applying for work
with a copywriting firm whose application form demanded a Twitter address. I had
none, and the dam’ form wasn’t going anywhere without one, no matter how hard I
hit the “Submit” button.
It’s still a total mystery to me, and I think I’ll keep it that way. At least I’ll try. I found on opening my new “timeline” that I already was “following” six people or things including a restaurant in Philadelphia (I live in Southern California) and had seven “followers,” one of whom I actually knew and knew wouldn’t be interested in following me on Twitter.
It’s still a total mystery to me, and I think I’ll keep it that way. At least I’ll try. I found on opening my new “timeline” that I already was “following” six people or things including a restaurant in Philadelphia (I live in Southern California) and had seven “followers,” one of whom I actually knew and knew wouldn’t be interested in following me on Twitter.
It's like having your mother-in-law decide who your friends are going to be.
As for the idea behind the whole thing: I gave my critique in a post on this blog on August 24
last year. My point was, and is, if it’s supposed to be communication, why
limit yourself so tightly? I’m for brevity, and sure, it needs to
be enforced on some people, but is that reason for all of us to abandon everything
in our vocabulary over one syllable? Some ideas deserve better. Or are such ideas not expected to make it to Twitter?
I admit I was writing in that earlier post without ever having read
any “tweets.” Bad journalism. Well, since actually reading some, I’ve had an
epiphany: I knew I’d seen something similar -- that cadence was familiar
-- but I couldn’t remember where. Then
the light went on: fortune cookies. I’ve seen Twitter compared to haiku, but
it’s more fortune cookie.
--------------
FDR
--------------
FDR
