140 characters, the maximum length of a tweet, if you are old enough to remember was the amount you got on a single SMS text message in the days before 1 of 2, or MMS or whatsapp or BBM or whatever this is what we had to limit ourselves to. Too many texts risked being ranty - risked someone replying to the middle text before the last one and the conversation getting very confused and out of sync. So Twitter limited its 'microblogging' character limit to the same amount and that decision has had lasting consequences I don't think anyone could have perceived years down the line.
Now you either get long, shouty multi tweet arguments with people you disagree with (Facebook is just as bad but for different reasons) or you get, as is the case with many celebrities when they dare to utter something stupid, ill thought out, ignorant or offensive someone just tweet back "CHECK YOUR PRIVILEGE" or "GO DIE TORY SCUM" or something equally unhelpful. Does anyone think that will really change that person's mind? Or advance the arguments?
You see my problem is, while I might (and do) occasionally tweet someone when I am offended by something they say I am not comfortable doing it. If it is somewhere between block/unfollow and just ignore it and walk away I am always in two minds. Because 140 characters is not nearly enough to make a nuanced critique of someone's speech in a manner that they might recognise they have made the error and apologise. SO more often than not I just let it slide. Angry with the person but frustrated that the forum is so unsuited to developed discussion.
And yet lots of other folk are unperturbed by this facet of the site. Many people are using it not only to RT things they agree with to their followers, but also to comment and correct on things that people they don't disagree with ( but still follow, clearly) write. I admit sometimes this is entertaining. Sometimes such as the #inspirationalwomen or #solidarityisforwhitewomen threads genuinely helpful and interesting. Is is just that the technology is so new that we are just evolving ways now of making a proper point on Twitter without resorting to confused strings of comments or insults? Can Twitter ever replace the editorial, the blog etc as a means of sustained discussion? I don't think so and this is evidenced by the number of people sharing news articles and stories. As I do too.
But here is the rub. If we can accept that in hashtag form that twitter might be illuminating in micro-blogging a particular aspect of a persons life or experience to inform a debate or in sharing snippets of information from a myriad of specialities but that it is not suitable for political or philosophical discussions can we just stop trying to change peoples minds directly on twitter. By all means do the sort of thing like #inspirationalwomen which changed my mind so drastically but can we stop tweeting people "check your privilege" or "tory scum" or whatever because I don't think it is helpful or productive. Or, we could just go back to tweeting pictures of our dinners and attend some public meetings, debates and hustings like we used to? I think that would be best.
No comments:
Post a Comment