I don’t tweet with discretion

This is a public service announcement. Some people on Twitter expect me to engage with them on that service. That is not going to happen. I only tweet automatically, through blog posts. The blog posts on this site are echoed to Twitter in a way that only the blogging software understands. I have never issued a discretionary tweet, nor do I plan to in the future.

Twitter’s rapid-fire format is contrary to what I consider to be a process conducive to reasonable thinking. Instead, I am a big believer in slow-reaction commentary.

Most posts, including this one, are composed days in advance of when they are scheduled to appear. That slows me down in two ways.

1. It keeps me from being able to jump in right away to comment on today’s news. In fact, the Topic Du Jour often passes by before I can comment on it. That is a good thing. I save most of my thoughts for issues with more enduring significance.

2. When I do compose a post, I have time to reconsider it before it appears. Sometimes, new information on the topic comes in. Sometimes, I have second thoughts. I probably edit close to half of my posts, occasionally deleting one altogether, before they appear. As it is, I probably regret about 1 out of every 20 posts that appears. If I took away the time lag, it would be closer to 10 out of 20 that I wish I could take back.

7 thoughts on “I don’t tweet with discretion

  1. Twitter seems to be true to its root word

    “Twitter \Twit”ter\, n. [From Twit.]
    One who twits, or reproaches; an upbraider.
    [1913 Webster]”

    “Twit \Twit\, v. t. [imp. & p. p. Twitted; p. pr. & vb. n.
    Twitting.] [OE. atwiten, AS. [ae]tw[imac]tan to reproach,
    blame; aet at + w[imac]tan to reproach, blame; originally, to
    observe, see, hence, to observe what is wrong (cf. the
    meanings of E. animadvert; akin to G. verweisen to censure,
    OHG. firw[imac]zan, Goth. fraweitan to avenge, L. videre to
    see. See Vision, Wit.]

    To vex by bringing to notice, or reminding of, a fault,
    defect, misfortune, or the like; to revile; to reproach; to
    upbraid; to taunt; as, he twitted his friend of falsehood.
    [1913 Webster]”

  2. The difference between people want to share genuine insight, and those who just want rapid-fire drivel.

        • I recommend going to some event where there will be some well-known journalists, and getting a seat in the second row so you can look over their shoulder at their activity on their laptops. I’ve done this several times now. What you will observe is just incessant, rapid-fire, ping-pong tweeting, both public and direct messages, and most to other well-known journalists (or other commentators with similar status in their circle). The frenzy of communication is similar to those old videos of frantic screaming on the floor of stock exchanges.

          These people pay a lot of attention to each other in this particular way – this is what twitter is perfectly made for – and it enables a kind of hyper-gossip which enables certain social phenomena and mechanisms – like arriving at consensus, or spontaneously coordinating what is and is not “newsworthy” – to occur at a blinding pace.

          All these top journalists and commentators will tell you that they feel under tremendous pressure to pay attention to what is going on and being said and to response in kind every minute of the day. For many people, this is cognitively taxing or emotionally exhausting, but others thrive on it.

          But the kind of thinking and conversation that happens in quick, small bursts is qualitatively of a completely different kind than anything that benefits from lengthy, deliberate reflection on one’s own. And since “idea communication markets” can experience “social failure” the way regular markets can sometimes experience market failure, it results in a lot more bad groupthink, and a lot more acrimonious tribalism.

          Like Douthat like to say (on twitter!), in certain ways, “The Internet Was A Mistake.”

          • Wow, great imagery. It rings quite true to me. The chattering class that feels themselves above the fray, observing and contextualizing, revolving and resolving to ultimately reach and deliver the resounding message.

Comments are closed.