Save the live tweets for revolutions
I got into a sustained bout of grumping today (damn.. swore I’d stop doing that when I left Cameroon).
Anyway, the cause of my whinging was a media event happening in London.
It took over my Twitter feed and, whereas I normally get irritated by waves of hashtagged tweets, this time the event seemed of such importance to those attending that they’d gone beyond that.
Conversations were often unprefixed by @ and weren’t even hashtagged. It couldn’t be filtered out. It felt like those involved were saying…the interesting people are here – why don’t the rest of you just go and watch the telly until we’re done.
My annoyance was more than just a bunged up tweet feed. As someone never resident in London it’s very easy to feel excluded from the capital clique. The impression that: *Everyone* means *everyone we know* isn’t far away.
And as for live tweeting in general…
Well I think live tweeting has found its place. Live tweeting is for revolutions. Live tweeting is for events of genuine international significance.
If your event isn’t likely to make prime time breaking news then maybe you should rethink.
Maybe it isn’t of the significance you think it is or hope it to be. Maybe, to put it bluntly, neither are you. Ask yourself how much is info and how much is ego?
Workshops, conferences, parties, launches, presentations and talks are simply not important enough to be live tweeted.
Live blog instead.
Don’t disrespect the live tweet. Save it for revolutions.
I disagree and I agree. Unless I am very interested, I tune out of these things. If I am very interested – like tonight – I tune in. This event just wasn’t for you. And anyway, isn’t this what twittersnooze was made for?
For the most part I can’t stand live tweeting of conferences and the like, but an event that lasts little under 2 hrs… I think I can tolerate that. If my tolerance levels were set any lower than that I can’t imagine how I’d cope living in a place like…. ooh…. Hanoi
And remember, those of us on shite connections in the other part of the world do genuinely find this stuff useful when the vid dies etc.
Amidst your general grumpyness and chippyness – I am in in broad agreement. At the risk of increasing your grumpyness level – it might be worth giving you my thoughts – or not!
As one of the people at the meeting – I did try and do as much as possible off twitter by using a liveblogging tool – scribblelive – which enables you to pull in tweets and images and add your own (unrestricted by 140 characters) notes.
I do absolutely agree with you about hashtags. Poor netiquette (remember that?) otherwise. As far as @ responses are concerned; if they’re used for replies – fine. I don’t have a particular problem with people expressing their thoughts at a live meeting providing they use the hashtag.
As far as live tweeting is concerned – I think if Richard Sambrook Head of BBC Global News – says something of general interest to people outside the meeting then it might be worth a live tweet. However, you’ll note that I didn’t do that.
While I agree with your general comments on London-centricity (I write from a train trogging through Kent and I won’t get home until 11.30 from a meeting that finished at 8.30), I think you should be careful about Frontline. There were 2 streams live from the event (one on Livestation and one on Ustream). As a charity, I know Frontline trys very hard to be inclusive – indeed there were participants from all over the world – some of whom were relying on the Tweetstream as they did not have the bandwidth to see the live video stream.
So ‘think on’ as my Yorkshire Grandma used to say . . .
Just to address both of you regarding shite connections. I’m just back from the shitiest of shite connections in Cameroon. Live streaming would have been absolutely impossible.
Twitter -especially as bunged up as it was – would be pretty intolerable. If I had no interest in the event that it would have been even worse – my Twitter feed would be an absolute write off for the whole evening.
So that leaves living blogging. Where I could let it download it and read it. Better still I could read it off RSS – very low bandwidth.
I am sorry but I don’t believe that people following live tweets “get” anything more than a simple feeling of social inclusion – and that just adds to the feeling of an “in crowd” – there was absolutely nothing . Not. One. Thing. That I could see that was remotely ground breaking that was tweeted or especially challenging or any real deviation from the any level of run of the mill thinking.
That is not to say it wasn’t interesting for those involved. But worth live tweeting? Really?
People will say they benefited. People will also say they were asked to live tweet. My experience with Twitter…people are just way too nice. “Twitter is for people you want to meet” isn’t that how it goes?
And so…”you’re tweets were so interesting”…”oh why don’t you live tweet it sounds fascinating”. It it all “me too” and all just social. We’re all still rattling around web2.0 and thinking…this is cool they just messaged me back and they’re at this big do. But the “cool” is the message back -not the content. The tool is all – the content is crap. A recurring theme.
Sure Sambrook was there and he’s a big cheese but I can follow him (and I do) every day on Twitter and read his blog and get waaaay more intelligent ideas.
But to go back…don’t talk to me about low bandwidth because if you have genuinely low bandwidth then the streaming is already out and a bunged up twitter feed is pretty annoying. The only way to get around that is decent blogging.
That’s if the real aim is a genuine sharing of information and not just a bunch of people trying to shout the loudest in the gang.
But Graham you are right about the tolerance – for that, at least, I apologise.
But that doesn’t mean I’m not right.
Look, it’s horses for courses and I’ve turned off plenty of folk in the past for doing exactly what you say above. I just don’t feel the need to get upset about it for an event that lasted 1hr 30mins
Brian, just been going through your pieces from the event – excellent stuff.
http://www.scribblelive.com/Event/On_the_Media_Access_Denied?Page=0
http://audioboo.fm/boos/61660
I’ve passed on to my colleagues at the Frontline Club as an example of how we might look at doing things in the near future – if we have manpower… If you’re interested in going to more events and fancy doing much the same, do let me know as we’re looking at doing some collaborative work around events. We have experimented with coveritlive and do a bunch of stuff on Twitter, but if we know you or someone else will be doing something we will certainly link out to it before, during and after.
Ta.
I’ve agreed with you in the past on this and I still do. I don’t find live tweeting of events very useful – but I do find longer-forms stuff, be it a traditional blog post, or that new-fangled CoverItLive business (
) much more so. Tweet the location of the live-blog and let people take their choice.
Steve –
I don’t want to use this particular forum to go into Wednesday night.
However, I do take all the points you make above – much as I DMed you at the time..
(sadly I can’t do that any more – but suspect the combination of my posh in-laws (not MY fault!), scaffolder RTs and the #ashes probably had a cumulative effect?)
I do though feel both Graham and Brian have very valid perspectives -
Above is link to a piece Brian has done for the new media140 blog I am helping to look after.
I don’t suppose you’d like to write a piece along the lines of this one above for us?
Please have a think – it would be fantastic to have your views on our shiny new forum -
(early traffic stats are really encouraging btw).
If not, are you happy for me to link to this post should I write my own one about Wednesday?
Best as ever
yrs
Dee
Just heard Brian’s audio boss that said I didn’t want a conversation. I answered his comment – what else am I supposed to do?
I’m also amazed that this is being referred to as “a row” – considering it was half a dozen tweets from me and a single blog post. People are so used to the smug 2.0 Twitter agree-at-all-costs bubble that some slight deviation from yes, yes, yes, is seen as a row.
Graham…upset is overly strong. I’d go with irritated. As for event coverage – what I’m increasingly thinking about is that while our inner PRs are seeking out ways to share information and spread it as widely as possible – is there a point whereby we stop for a second and weigh up our news values?
How much do we need to deluge every web tool and outlet? How much are we broadcasting when what we really need to do is just communicate with those who are involved or who have expressed an interest.
Any PR would take a front page regardless of the importance or interest of their press release. Now we are essentially PRs and editors should we think like editors more and say…what is this really worth?
We talk often about the noise and the babble. But increasingly it seems to me that the noise isn’t just the “what I had for breakfast” it’s the people regurgitating the same discussions, broadcasting the arse of it, everybody (yet again) agreeing, everybody pointing their fingers at the same bad guys (stick in the mud trad media usually) and then smugly congratulating themselves for being on the right side.
What’s the other option? Hard to say but we’re in danger of discussing things to death . Perhaps it’s time to say..if you believe, what you believe then *YOU* do it and make it work. None of us will know what really works until someone actually does it instead of this endless web2.0 smug babble.
It’s fine to be part of the conversation – but that on it’s own is not enough. Perhaps too much of what needs to be discussed has already been discussed to death.
Dee – I think you are taking it too personally. It’s nothing personal at all. Nothing ever is. I’d love to write something. Something along the lines of this comment so far.
Adam…again we are in agreement.
Also Brian you said on your audio boo when analysing my “save the live tweets for revolutions” was like saying save your mobile phone for calling the fire brigade.
Unless you have a thousand people listening in on your mobile phone then no…no, it’s not like that at all.
And now beware the new phenomenon… numerous tweets by people to tell each other they commented on a blog entry about excessive tweeting about conferences.
I did realise the irony of a conversation about too much conversation.
Maybe I will start a blank blog that everyday I will just add space and will promote it each day by tweeting more blank space.
Hang on…we don’t need that. How about people just saying something original occasionally and people occasionally saying…no, that’s bollocks. Instead of this interminable agree-fest.
I wondered if anyone – anyone at all – blogged that what Sambrook said at the event was bollocks. I’m not saying it was but surely someone has a different point of view. Or have we all suspended our own critical abilities and instead are happy just to link and retweet for ever more?
Great that you happy to do a post & think along the lines of the comment above would be just brilliant -
Not being prescriptive on length yet and as know you’re in the throes of international moving then deadline is whenever you can manage to scribble us your thoughts.
(word doc if poss to dominiquej@atlas.co.uk whenever…)
sorry to be bit girlie and yes you’re utterly right: I do take stuff way too personally!
(had a cr*p few months I’m afraid and suspect the old hide is still a bit on the thin side – you can imagine how well I “thrived” in the Grauniad newsroom….)
Look forward to post & hope Hanoi lives up to expectations -
We all have thin hides…my grumpyness is just to cover for my own girlyness. Honest. I’m soft as.
Will write as soon as I have time. Might be from a hotel room in Hanoi next week.