It seems that the "microblogging" site known as Twitter is something that you just can't get away from. It's suddenly been the talk of the web and mentioned everywhere from newspapers to television and radio. It's the "in-thing", the flavour of the season, the geeky emperor's new clothes, it's even a new type of status symbol. After all, you, the Twitterer (Twiteree?), are informing those that "follow" you of your current status every time you can be bothered to update your profile. I'm a bit concerned by the term "follow" even in the Twit sense, it sounds dangerously cultish and I shall be informing The Daily Mail as soon as possible. Twitter is popular in a similar way that Facebook was last year. I've always had my reservations about Facebook. Just like a dodgy religious order, it's easy to join but a hassle to leave. I've read that if you decide to delete your Facebook account, your personal information that you've typed onto your "page" is kept on their servers (unless you've deleted everything manually on your actual profile prior to terminating your membership - or so they say). Libertarians may well carp on about CCTV and Oyster cards keeping tabs on our "freedom of movement" but we're quite willing to sign up to daft networking sites that display our real names at the top of our profiles and then we proceed to inform everyone that we're going to Waitrose.
Top Tip: why not sign up using a false name?
Status: "Bruiser McHuge is playing away with Elton at The Withdean."
Hang on; MySpaz, Fartbook and Twatter - they're just a laugh, aren't they? What's that? You want to send me a virtual marijuana plant through Facebook? That's really funny. Send me a real one or nothing at all. So are these sites really pointless and daft? Horses for courses, me dearies. People keep in touch with each other through various means, some prefer hand written letters, others prefer text messages by phone. Some stick to plain email, others use Bebo. But Twitter is not just another means of communication, it's another networking site.
So when it comes to the plethora of such sites available, why do many of us sign up to more than just one? In theory, I could scrap all the sites I have an account with and just stick to MySpace as an overall solution for my web needs; it allows me to blog (goodbye Blogger), upload photos (ta-ta Flickr), post videos (cheerio YouTube) and I can even update my status (see ya later, Twitter-ator). After all, there can only be so much attention that anyone can gain by plastering themselves all over the 'net in order to get it. (Incidentally, who are these sad bastards who've Googled themselves? Bruiser McHuge, c'mon down!)
Here lies my problem and it's a worrying one. Choice is a wonderful thing, but as I get older I feel compelled to want to cut the bullshit and compartmentalise everything into one box similar to what Generalissimo Franco tried to do with most of the Iberian languages of Spain - he banned all but one. Rest assured, I shall refrain from doing so (I ain't got the power, see?) but checking for updates on all these sites means more time spent in front of a VDU instead of getting on with more important things like...like...what did we do before the internet?
If I were to delete my various online accounts, I'd have to save any work that I've already uploaded (posts, pictures, videos etc - and there's plenty of 'em), and then re-upload it all to the one site so that everything can be accessible for anyone that wants it. But I can't be bothered with all that crap, it'll only take ages which means more time spent in front of a VDU instead of getting on with more important things like...like...well, you get the picture.
So even though I've been part of it, I view Twitter as slang similar both in rhyme and meaning as to what "Gary Glitter" and "council gritter" is.
Nowt but arse.
Nowt but arse.
