Comments on: Defending Twitter and Facebook status updates http://www.nehrlich.com/blog/2008/02/27/defending-twitter-and-facebook-status-updates/ Eric Nehrlich, Unrepentant Generalist Fri, 08 Aug 2008 00:45:44 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2 By: Eric Nehrlich, Unrepentant Generalist || Social objects || June || 2008 http://www.nehrlich.com/blog/2008/02/27/defending-twitter-and-facebook-status-updates/#comment-161810 Eric Nehrlich, Unrepentant Generalist || Social objects || June || 2008 Sun, 22 Jun 2008 06:01:43 +0000 http://www.nehrlich.com/blog/2008/02/27/defending-twitter-and-facebook-status-updates/#comment-161810 [...] social communities engendered by such technology that change markets (and possibly the world!). Twitter/Facebook/LiveJournal are interesting because now I have an ambient awareness of my friends that enables me to maintain communities with [...] […] social communities engendered by such technology that change markets (and possibly the world!). Twitter/Facebook/LiveJournal are interesting because now I have an ambient awareness of my friends that enables me to maintain communities with […]

]]> By: Justin http://www.nehrlich.com/blog/2008/02/27/defending-twitter-and-facebook-status-updates/#comment-143373 Justin Thu, 13 Mar 2008 03:33:00 +0000 http://www.nehrlich.com/blog/2008/02/27/defending-twitter-and-facebook-status-updates/#comment-143373 Well written post (sorry for the comment above, was having a few technical difficulties). The concept of phatic communication is new to me, and I like the points you make about it. I don't agree with you, however, that Twitter and Facebook updates are necessarily sending that kind of signal - in fact, it may be just the opposite. It inspired me to write down some thoughts of my own - link above, too lengthy to reproduce here. Well written post (sorry for the comment above, was having a few technical difficulties). The concept of phatic communication is new to me, and I like the points you make about it. I don’t agree with you, however, that Twitter and Facebook updates are necessarily sending that kind of signal - in fact, it may be just the opposite. It inspired me to write down some thoughts of my own - link above, too lengthy to reproduce here.

]]> By: white summer and red bicycle » Blog Archive » Kicking and Screaming http://www.nehrlich.com/blog/2008/02/27/defending-twitter-and-facebook-status-updates/#comment-143333 white summer and red bicycle » Blog Archive » Kicking and Screaming Wed, 12 Mar 2008 19:17:57 +0000 http://www.nehrlich.com/blog/2008/02/27/defending-twitter-and-facebook-status-updates/#comment-143333 [...] Eric Nehrlich’s blog post on defending Twitter and Facebook updates got me thinking as to why I’ve taken so [...] […] Eric Nehrlich’s blog post on defending Twitter and Facebook updates got me thinking as to why I’ve taken so […]

]]> By: Eric http://www.nehrlich.com/blog/2008/02/27/defending-twitter-and-facebook-status-updates/#comment-141195 Eric Thu, 06 Mar 2008 14:02:54 +0000 http://www.nehrlich.com/blog/2008/02/27/defending-twitter-and-facebook-status-updates/#comment-141195 <a href=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ddO9idmax0o rel="nofollow">Twitter in Plain English</a> - nice YouTube video on the subject. <a href=http://www.thisisgoingtobebig.com/2008/03/still-dont-get.html rel="nofollow">Thanks Charlie!</a> Twitter in Plain English - nice YouTube video on the subject. Thanks Charlie!

]]> By: Julie, writer Surefirewealth.com http://www.nehrlich.com/blog/2008/02/27/defending-twitter-and-facebook-status-updates/#comment-140218 Julie, writer Surefirewealth.com Mon, 03 Mar 2008 11:22:33 +0000 http://www.nehrlich.com/blog/2008/02/27/defending-twitter-and-facebook-status-updates/#comment-140218 That's a clear way of putting it. You're right. It's not the one-liners on what blogger x or y is doing that creates the meaning but rather the communication. I have never thought of it that way. Perhaps this is what twitter makers wanted to establish in the first place. People tend to get carried away with the basic uses of such applications. That’s a clear way of putting it. You’re right. It’s not the one-liners on what blogger x or y is doing that creates the meaning but rather the communication. I have never thought of it that way. Perhaps this is what twitter makers wanted to establish in the first place. People tend to get carried away with the basic uses of such applications.

]]> By: Eric http://www.nehrlich.com/blog/2008/02/27/defending-twitter-and-facebook-status-updates/#comment-139102 Eric Wed, 27 Feb 2008 15:37:45 +0000 http://www.nehrlich.com/blog/2008/02/27/defending-twitter-and-facebook-status-updates/#comment-139102 Bats, it's definitely interesting what the Internet does to public/private. I just ordered <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0300124988" rel="nofollow">Daniel Solove's book on the future of reputation</a> after reading the first chapter online at <a href="http://docs.law.gwu.edu/facweb/dsolove/Future-of-Reputation/" rel="nofollow">the book site</a>, which discusses the case of the "dog poop girl" in Korea, who had an unfortunate lack of judgment that was captured on a cell phone camera, and then propagated worldwide, so she can never escape that one moment. Beemer, attention overload is definitely an issue. This is why I want all of my tools to propagate to each other - my blog propagates to LiveJournal and thence to Facebook. I want Twitter to do the same. That way people don't have to check more places - just the ones they already use. Bats, it’s definitely interesting what the Internet does to public/private. I just ordered Daniel Solove’s book on the future of reputation after reading the first chapter online at the book site, which discusses the case of the “dog poop girl” in Korea, who had an unfortunate lack of judgment that was captured on a cell phone camera, and then propagated worldwide, so she can never escape that one moment.

Beemer, attention overload is definitely an issue. This is why I want all of my tools to propagate to each other - my blog propagates to LiveJournal and thence to Facebook. I want Twitter to do the same. That way people don’t have to check more places - just the ones they already use.

]]> By: Beemer http://www.nehrlich.com/blog/2008/02/27/defending-twitter-and-facebook-status-updates/#comment-139089 Beemer Wed, 27 Feb 2008 14:54:01 +0000 http://www.nehrlich.com/blog/2008/02/27/defending-twitter-and-facebook-status-updates/#comment-139089 I think maybe one of the reasons there's a need to defend/explain Twitter and the like is that when people who don't use it hear about it, they feel like they're being told "hey, here's another thing you need to pay attention to" and their response is at least in part an expression of information overload: "What, more!? I have too much to keep track of already! Why do I have to pay attention to this, it's meaningless blather!" I think maybe one of the reasons there’s a need to defend/explain Twitter and the like is that when people who don’t use it hear about it, they feel like they’re being told “hey, here’s another thing you need to pay attention to” and their response is at least in part an expression of information overload: “What, more!? I have too much to keep track of already! Why do I have to pay attention to this, it’s meaningless blather!”

]]> By: Bats http://www.nehrlich.com/blog/2008/02/27/defending-twitter-and-facebook-status-updates/#comment-139079 Bats Wed, 27 Feb 2008 14:24:57 +0000 http://www.nehrlich.com/blog/2008/02/27/defending-twitter-and-facebook-status-updates/#comment-139079 <I>He pointed out that if you went to a mall and sat at the food court near a group of teenage girls, you would overhear a conversation including gossip about various boys and who was seeing whom. The mall is a public space, but “if you were listening in on their conversation at the mall, … it would be clear that you were the weird one</I> There was a section of <a HREF="http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200707/myspace" rel="nofollow">a Caitlin Flanagan article in the Atlantic</A> that talks about this subject, as well as the generational divide--the older folks still find the online version of this creepy, but folks who grew up with this technology don't seem to have the same feeling (sorry about the length of the quote). For reference, Flanagan is a mother of two young boys; her article was a review of <I>Generation MySpace: Helping Your Teen Survive Online Adolescence</I> and another similar book. <I>MySpace has more than 100 million members and an unknown number of unregistered lurkers. Last spring, I became one of the latter. The site seemed hopelessly confusing at first, so to get started, I went to the search box and typed in the name of the high school closest to my house. It’s the best girls’ school in Los Angeles, with a walled and beautiful campus. As soon as I entered the name, the profiles of several girls popped up, and I clicked on the first one, a girl I’ll call “Jenna.” (Protecting her identity seems at once important and ridiculous: I am taking pains to make private information that she has taken pains to make public.) I could tell in a minute that this was no fake profile. I taught at a Los Angeles private school for many years, and the associations and places to which she made reference were all of a piece—at once too prosaic and too specific to be fabricated. She was a nice girl, you could tell that right away: Her profile picture showed her in a bikini at the beach, but it wasn’t posed or self-consciously provocative. There were pictures from all kinds of parties and from trips to Disneyland and the Santa Monica Pier, and she had a steady boyfriend who posted to her page all the time, as well as a group of friends and family members who clearly thought the world of her. As I read her messages (especially the charming ones between her and her boyfriend, who had moved from “best friend” to “lover” status over the course of many sweet and well-documented months), I felt guilty, as though I were looking at things I shouldn’t have been, as though I were lingering at a doorway, overhearing something private. And yet all of them were posted in a place that was designed not just to allow me in but to welcome me. In that moment, the reality of my new life on the far side of a generation gap hit me fully. My fundamental understanding of privacy—the notion that one shouldn’t listen in on the personal conversations of others—marked me as old. I’m not old because I like to peek into people’s private lives; I’m old because I feel guilty about it. And I couldn’t shake the feeling that—merely by trolling slowly and patiently through her pictures and conversations and lists of favorite things—I had become predatory. Dwelling secretly in the private life of a beautiful young girl seemed inherently sinister, and I had to remind myself, over and over, that I was doing nothing wrong.</I> He pointed out that if you went to a mall and sat at the food court near a group of teenage girls, you would overhear a conversation including gossip about various boys and who was seeing whom. The mall is a public space, but “if you were listening in on their conversation at the mall, … it would be clear that you were the weird one

There was a section of a Caitlin Flanagan article in the Atlantic that talks about this subject, as well as the generational divide–the older folks still find the online version of this creepy, but folks who grew up with this technology don’t seem to have the same feeling (sorry about the length of the quote). For reference, Flanagan is a mother of two young boys; her article was a review of Generation MySpace: Helping Your Teen Survive Online Adolescence and another similar book.

MySpace has more than 100 million members and an unknown number of unregistered lurkers. Last spring, I became one of the latter. The site seemed hopelessly confusing at first, so to get started, I went to the search box and typed in the name of the high school closest to my house. It’s the best girls’ school in Los Angeles, with a walled and beautiful campus. As soon as I entered the name, the profiles of several girls popped up, and I clicked on the first one, a girl I’ll call “Jenna.” (Protecting her identity seems at once important and ridiculous: I am taking pains to make private information that she has taken pains to make public.)

I could tell in a minute that this was no fake profile. I taught at a Los Angeles private school for many years, and the associations and places to which she made reference were all of a piece—at once too prosaic and too specific to be fabricated. She was a nice girl, you could tell that right away: Her profile picture showed her in a bikini at the beach, but it wasn’t posed or self-consciously provocative. There were pictures from all kinds of parties and from trips to Disneyland and the Santa Monica Pier, and she had a steady boyfriend who posted to her page all the time, as well as a group of friends and family members who clearly thought the world of her. As I read her messages (especially the charming ones between her and her boyfriend, who had moved from “best friend” to “lover” status over the course of many sweet and well-documented months), I felt guilty, as though I were looking at things I shouldn’t have been, as though I were lingering at a doorway, overhearing something private. And yet all of them were posted in a place that was designed not just to allow me in but to welcome me.

In that moment, the reality of my new life on the far side of a generation gap hit me fully. My fundamental understanding of privacy—the notion that one shouldn’t listen in on the personal conversations of others—marked me as old. I’m not old because I like to peek into people’s private lives; I’m old because I feel guilty about it. And I couldn’t shake the feeling that—merely by trolling slowly and patiently through her pictures and conversations and lists of favorite things—I had become predatory. Dwelling secretly in the private life of a beautiful young girl seemed inherently sinister, and I had to remind myself, over and over, that I was doing nothing wrong.

]]>