I suddenly understand the popularity of Twitter: the 140-character limit makes sure anything and everything said there is completely content-free, just like the popular bottle-feed culture demands.
"Let's have a debate."
"Great! But we must stick to 140 characters per statement. This makes sure nothing is ever said which requires thinking for me."
7 comments:
Could be the opposite! If you write using the usual Twitter 'I'm like' and 'then he's like' and 'lol' stuff, you've already wasted a lot of words on being a fashion victim. But if you write carefully, as the creative writing classes teach you to, you can make every word count, and think what a couple of sentences you'll end up with! Carefully considered, concise writing that says no more than necessary, but far more than usual! Not that I use Twitter myself ...
This makes sure nothing is ever said which requires thinking for me.
This is why I would have thought you'd love it. You can never be bothered doing any but the most minimal research into anything. You seem to love discussing things in a really shallow, desultory kind of way.
Depends upon who you follow. I follow professors, writers, and musicians who are always turning me on to new books, research, and music. For that, it is very good. But then maybe that's just me. :O)
Yes, admittedly it's perfectly useful for a couple words and a link.
You can always Twitlonger, Eo. :-)
I'm with 'The Dissonance:' I get a LOT of good links to things that I'm very interested in. :-)
Even people I like - Stephen Fry for example - don't really have much to say. It's not that interesting to hear him talk about being stuck in traffic en route to an awards show. Or how Phil Taylor's just thrown another 180.
Yes, that's exactly how I feel. One would think that people like Fry or Neil Gaiman or William Gibson could be interesting at least.
Post a Comment