In An Alternate Universe, How 20th Century Fox Could Have Responded To Wolverine Leak

Topical, Polemical And Short: Twitter? Or American Revolutionary Pamphlets?

from the don't-knock-it dept

Thu, Apr 2nd 2009 9:30am — Mike Masnick

Just as we're seeing the various naysayers of any popular new communications technology come out swinging against Twitter, Rick Klau does a nice job reminding people that this is nothing new. With every new form of communication, people freak out about how there's no "rules" and that some people are using it for bad things or (worse!) mundane things. Rick points out the following quote to prove his point:

"Twitter is a one-man show. One has complete freedom of expression, including, if one chooses, the freedom to be scurrilous, abusive, and seditious; or, on the other hand, to be more detailed, serious and "high-brow" than is ever possible in a newspaper or in most kinds of periodicals. At the same time, since Twitter is always short, it can be produced much more quickly than a book, and in principle, at any rate, can reach a bigger public. Above all, Twitter does not have to follow any prescribed pattern... All that is required of it is that it shall be topical, polemical, and short."

The quote comes from Pulitzer Prize winning historian Bernard Bailyn... except that's not the actual quote. Rick simply replaced pamphlets with Twitter -- as the original is talking about the use of pamphlets in the lead up to the Revolutionary War, and how they helped spread ideas. Yet, today, as then, people will complain that the content is "currilous, abusive, and seditious." Every time I see someone complain about how Twitter (or blogging) is somehow not valuable because of all the crappy, boring or mundane content found via those platforms, I simply wonder why the complainer follows crappy, boring or mundane Twitter users and blogs.

On top of that, the question of content being banal or mundane is really in the eye of the beholder. For example, many people point to Twitter messages about "what someone's eating for lunch" to show how useless Twitter can be. Yet, for me, just such a message has resulted in me getting to meet someone who I might not have met otherwise. And the more that I've used Twitter, the more and more useful I've found many of those same "mundane" messages. It certainly may not be for everyone, but I find it amusing that some can brush off the entire idea as being useless when so many people (including myself) have found it to be tremendously valuable and useful, if used properly. Are those who are brushing it off assuming that the millions of people who find it useful are lying?

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: bernard bailyn, blogging, history, social networking, usefulness
Companies: twitter

9 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 2 Apr 2009 @ 9:44am

Maybe plagiarism can add value?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- :Lobo Santo, 2 Apr 2009 @ 9:58am
  
  Re:
  No, no, no; with feeling, like this:
  
  Maybe plagiarism can add value!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 2 Apr 2009 @ 11:11am
  
  Re:
  RT: @Anonymous Coward Maybe plagiarism can add value?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 2 Apr 2009 @ 10:02am

If it's any consolation, I hear that the first thing off of the Gutenberg printing press after the Bible was adult-related material.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Kevin, 2 Apr 2009 @ 11:02am

Re: Twitter
One of the main differences was the level of eloquence exhibited in say, Common Sense, and the gravitas associated with pamphlets of the time, compared with the absolute nonsensical drivel that drives 98% of Twitter tweets.

Was that elitist?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 2 Apr 2009 @ 12:20pm
  
  Re: Re: Twitter
  No. Its elitist when you think you are better than someone else, not when you actually are.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Felix Pleșoianu, 2 Apr 2009 @ 1:05pm

Come on. Microblogging is criticized by those who don't use it (and hence don't know much about it). Similarly, science is distrusted by people who don't understand what science is all about. Same could be said about the Internet, computers and a lot of other things. There's a pattern here, somewhere...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 2 Apr 2009 @ 1:14pm
  
  Re:
  Science is almost always criticized by the religious because it conflicts with their religion. Microblogging is almost always criticized by people who just know it's crap even if there is no conflict.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 2 Apr 2009 @ 1:31pm

Re: Re:
So Microblogging is kind of like posting is the comments section of an online forum?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]