Leaving Twitter is difficult for the first three days. You feel like you're missing everything. Then what I noticed was that basically I was no longer having to brief all my normal friends on dumb Twitter disputes they had missed. The temptation to go back is real, but the actual effect on your life is not huge. As for politicians, a few have never been on Twitter and a large number write only anodyne updates about their work, like a bulletin board. Essentially nobody notices that they're not being fun and dynamic. I think the electoral cost of being off Twitter is near zero and the risk associated with being too active is high.
I liked how you described the design of the different spaces, and how it makes you feel. I relate.
After watching The Social Dilemma (it explained so clearly why I felt so bad/weird/addicted from using the social machines), I deleted fb and twitter a few months ago. Zero regrets and more mental/emotional bandwidth. Kind of feels like I got my brain back.
I use Twitter to curate a news feed from Foreign Policy, NatPost, and various blogs (including this one) I like to read. I don't really use it to follow individuals that yammer about the various culture wars anymore.
Youtube essentially functions as my TV (I cut the cord years ago). Broadcast news curates individual clips of their news stories, Steve Paiken's show is there, Jordan Peterson has some interesting guests, and, natch, the Gerson and Gurney Show. For stuff like history, politics, gaming, and music, there are many good YT-ers that put out long video essays and deep dives into a topic (20 min+) that's more informative than just about anything on broadcast news.
And of course, DON'T READ THE COMMENTS SECTION unless you really want your daily dose of outrage.
Yes! Great piece. One thing for sure, there’s no winning on Twitter. It’s great for sharing bits of information but I’ve always thought any sort of governance through tweet was a big mistake.
Not even my youngest friends are on it, it's just not needed for people not managing public communications for money, which includes all journalists, of course (and anybody selling anything). We're just audience, and it's US that should leave!
I used to pity journalists for their need for it (in the case of right-wing and neutral ones) or hold them in contempt (if left-wing, railing against tyrannical corporations, while giving an awful one free content). Then a young lady journo on Canadaland just the other week spoke of leaving it, coming back some months later - and immediately getting work. I can't hold that in any contempt. For groceries, one does what one must.
I'm happy to read Paul Wells' thought that it would be a minor thing for a politician to leave; as a voter, I certainly agree. I'd recommend that politicians that do that, also trumpet the departure in every speech, refuse to answer tweets, mock their opponents for "twitting". Reducing political discussion to a paragraph is nuts, and insulting to voters; it's legitimate mockery.
Have to add: Macleod, saying that communities have embedded incentives and tendencies in their design, seems to have invented Critical Twit Theory. It must be forbidden. It's highly offensive and prejudicial to criticize societal structure.
Twitter is really odd as it feels like its the 'town square' of public disourse, but daily active users in the US totals around 38 million people. That's not nothing, but it's hardly a represenation of the entire population! Studies have also shown that the majority of social media content comes from a relatively small number of users, and engagement can be 'gamed' -- whether that's by paying to promote posts or inauthentically via botnets and such. So, social media creates this illusion of reflecting a broad range of topics and opinion but doesn't entirely deliver that.
Add to that an algorithm which, at least to me, seems to be designed to offer the *promise* of satisfaction, but only delivers infrequenly. I suspect that's intentional -- that what the system wants is a kind of passive engagement, endlessly scrolling looking for something satisfying so you see the sponsored posts and produce monitizable numbers. But, to a user, it feels a LOT like channel surfing TV twenty years ago; endlessly hunting for someting really interesting with little luck.
I do stumble across great content via social, but that doesn't seem to be what it's primarily designed for. It feels like there is a huge possibiliity for tools that actually do help people find content that is consistently really interesting; something smart enough to aid discovery in a really personal, meaningful way. The current tools are either designed to promote endless searching/scrolling or (like music and video streaming) seem to be really basic, serving lots more of what you already watch rather than something new that you haven't found yet. I think I'd pay for a better tool that helps me consistently, quickly find stuff I like without wasting a ton of time sifting through a lot of "close, but not quite" content.
Seriously? A column about leaving Twitter? Is this the sheeple we’ve become? C’mon folks, even on a slow news day there has got to be something better to publish than this pathetic drivel.
Good article. It would be interesting to know somehow whether social media is a net benefit to democracy.
I took a break from Twitter and only sort of miss it. I had intentionally followed accounts that held different views than mine so I could burst my filter bubble. I may have been too successful though because it became stressful scrolling through the comments.
I haven’t found the happy-medium there yet but I’ll likely give it another shot.
Leaving Twitter is difficult for the first three days. You feel like you're missing everything. Then what I noticed was that basically I was no longer having to brief all my normal friends on dumb Twitter disputes they had missed. The temptation to go back is real, but the actual effect on your life is not huge. As for politicians, a few have never been on Twitter and a large number write only anodyne updates about their work, like a bulletin board. Essentially nobody notices that they're not being fun and dynamic. I think the electoral cost of being off Twitter is near zero and the risk associated with being too active is high.
I liked how you described the design of the different spaces, and how it makes you feel. I relate.
After watching The Social Dilemma (it explained so clearly why I felt so bad/weird/addicted from using the social machines), I deleted fb and twitter a few months ago. Zero regrets and more mental/emotional bandwidth. Kind of feels like I got my brain back.
I use Twitter to curate a news feed from Foreign Policy, NatPost, and various blogs (including this one) I like to read. I don't really use it to follow individuals that yammer about the various culture wars anymore.
Youtube essentially functions as my TV (I cut the cord years ago). Broadcast news curates individual clips of their news stories, Steve Paiken's show is there, Jordan Peterson has some interesting guests, and, natch, the Gerson and Gurney Show. For stuff like history, politics, gaming, and music, there are many good YT-ers that put out long video essays and deep dives into a topic (20 min+) that's more informative than just about anything on broadcast news.
And of course, DON'T READ THE COMMENTS SECTION unless you really want your daily dose of outrage.
Yes! Great piece. One thing for sure, there’s no winning on Twitter. It’s great for sharing bits of information but I’ve always thought any sort of governance through tweet was a big mistake.
Not even my youngest friends are on it, it's just not needed for people not managing public communications for money, which includes all journalists, of course (and anybody selling anything). We're just audience, and it's US that should leave!
I used to pity journalists for their need for it (in the case of right-wing and neutral ones) or hold them in contempt (if left-wing, railing against tyrannical corporations, while giving an awful one free content). Then a young lady journo on Canadaland just the other week spoke of leaving it, coming back some months later - and immediately getting work. I can't hold that in any contempt. For groceries, one does what one must.
I'm happy to read Paul Wells' thought that it would be a minor thing for a politician to leave; as a voter, I certainly agree. I'd recommend that politicians that do that, also trumpet the departure in every speech, refuse to answer tweets, mock their opponents for "twitting". Reducing political discussion to a paragraph is nuts, and insulting to voters; it's legitimate mockery.
Have to add: Macleod, saying that communities have embedded incentives and tendencies in their design, seems to have invented Critical Twit Theory. It must be forbidden. It's highly offensive and prejudicial to criticize societal structure.
Twitter is really odd as it feels like its the 'town square' of public disourse, but daily active users in the US totals around 38 million people. That's not nothing, but it's hardly a represenation of the entire population! Studies have also shown that the majority of social media content comes from a relatively small number of users, and engagement can be 'gamed' -- whether that's by paying to promote posts or inauthentically via botnets and such. So, social media creates this illusion of reflecting a broad range of topics and opinion but doesn't entirely deliver that.
Add to that an algorithm which, at least to me, seems to be designed to offer the *promise* of satisfaction, but only delivers infrequenly. I suspect that's intentional -- that what the system wants is a kind of passive engagement, endlessly scrolling looking for something satisfying so you see the sponsored posts and produce monitizable numbers. But, to a user, it feels a LOT like channel surfing TV twenty years ago; endlessly hunting for someting really interesting with little luck.
I do stumble across great content via social, but that doesn't seem to be what it's primarily designed for. It feels like there is a huge possibiliity for tools that actually do help people find content that is consistently really interesting; something smart enough to aid discovery in a really personal, meaningful way. The current tools are either designed to promote endless searching/scrolling or (like music and video streaming) seem to be really basic, serving lots more of what you already watch rather than something new that you haven't found yet. I think I'd pay for a better tool that helps me consistently, quickly find stuff I like without wasting a ton of time sifting through a lot of "close, but not quite" content.
Seriously? A column about leaving Twitter? Is this the sheeple we’ve become? C’mon folks, even on a slow news day there has got to be something better to publish than this pathetic drivel.
Good article. It would be interesting to know somehow whether social media is a net benefit to democracy.
I took a break from Twitter and only sort of miss it. I had intentionally followed accounts that held different views than mine so I could burst my filter bubble. I may have been too successful though because it became stressful scrolling through the comments.
I haven’t found the happy-medium there yet but I’ll likely give it another shot.
The real test is whether the candidate - as with anyone who is the subject of media commentary - can avoid reading the comments.
I nuked FB after the George Floyd disaster and honestly it's the best thing I ever did. Even though I live away from family I don't miss it.