WHO WE ARE: Couldn't give a twit

Wednesday May 9, 2007 04:08 PM

Who We Are

To learn what Avatar has in common with Gilgamesh, go to The Tribal Mind.

A column about Australia by David Dale, published in The Sun-Herald, 27/12/2009
It was the year when Twitter came and went -- a fad formed in February and dropped in December, proof that this is the land of the short attention span.

Australia has long been legendary as a nation of Early Adopters, the ideal test market for new gadgets and products. We embraced colour TV, the VCR, the mobile phone, the games machine, the DVD and the iPod faster than any other outpost of Western civilisation.

Now it's apparent that another of our traits could be equally useful to the international marketing industry -- we are Early Discarders. On television, we lost interest in Lost, Ugly Betty, Heroes, Prison Break, 24 and Flashforward long before the Americans.

In communications, Australia's most trendsetting spokesmodel, Ruby Rose, announced that she has cancelled her Twitter service. Telling the world everything you're doing every minute is just not amusing any more. Ruby Rose has apparently experienced an epiphany: that when you have nothing interesting to say, there is no need to say anything. If Australia's answer to Paris Hilton decides she couldn't give a twit, the rest of the partygoing community cannot be far behind. Rose is not necessarily a cause, but she is almost certainly a symptom of social change.

Back in February, when the media started trumpeting Twitter as the hottest self-promotion tool since the megaphone, I asked a social researcher what he made of it. "It's a classic case of BOFSDT" he replied. That acronym stands for Boring Old Farts Suddenly Discover Technology.

"The teenagers aren't using it," he said. "They're happy with FaceBook. People over 30 do most of the twittering -- especially politicians and journalists who think it makes them hip and groovy. Their children think it's a wank."

The Twitter frenzy of the BOFs peaked during the Liberal leadership chaos, when multitudes of grey-haired males were seen frantically thumbing their mobiles in party rooms and parliamentary chambers. It was downhill from there. A month later Ruby Rose delivered the death blow.

In designing a communication tool by which people with short attention spans could scatter their every thought to the winds, the creators of Twitter planted the seeds of their own destruction -- because people with short attention spans must move on.

The media observers who hailed Twitter as The Next Big Thing were like the writers of the movie trilogy Back to the Future. In episode two, Michael J. Fox travels to the year 2015, and finds that all communications are conducted by fax. Every room in the house contains a machine spewing out shiny paper messages. That proved to be one of the most embarrassing predictions of the 20th century.

The film was made in 1989, when the writers could not have foreseen the arrival of text messaging and the internet. But anyone currently planning a movie about the year 2015 has the benefit of Ruby Rose's revelation to save them from suggesting Twitter will still be around in five years time.

I'd like to be able to predict that by 2015 people will no longer become famous simply by appearing at a lot of parties, but that social change may take a little longer.

Go to Comments to discuss other fads that are on the way out.

Footnote:: Since that column appeared, Ruby Rose has reopened her twitter account to announce her latest plan to marry a model, while the British comedian Stephen Fry has deleted his twitter account in order to get on with real life.

David Dale is the author of The Little Book of Australia -- A snapshot of who we are (Allen and Unwin). For daily updates on Australian attitudes, bookmark blogs.sunherald.com.au/whoweare.

COMMENTS

David,
You are a pithy excuse for a journalist. Learn to do some research you clown.
Hopefully 2010 is the year that you learn that a good story is more important than impressions and serving ads.
So one girl, who has done nothing of note in Australia other than appear on television, mentions she's closing her account. She has nothing to say, big whoop many of us could tell you that. Plenty of others have done the same, but no mention of them??
Sigh. SMH lift your game. It was this publication that was heralding Twitter as the next big thing. We're not all as stupid as you think.

by Dec on December 27, 2009 at 01:41 AM

This post is absolute rubbish. I can sum up your sentiment in one sentence "When Ruby Rose stops using twitter, so does everyone else."
Even if Ruby Rose can claim moderate TV fame, who cares about her? And since when is the primary use of Twitter for stalking celebrities?
You assumed wrongly that lack of teenage users spells death of Twitter, but did you know that Facebook's average user age is also above 30 years old?
No substance in this post buddy, right from the first sentence.

by Arthur on December 27, 2009 at 06:58 AM

Journalists - that's another fad on the way out. Newspapers - the death knell is sounding too. Twitter - not so fast. Journalists got the whole idea of twitter ass about from the get go. It's not about broadcasting, it's about listening. Find and follow your favourite personalities, thought leaders, designers, stars, brands. whomever, and listen to what they have to say and join (or start) a CONVERSATION. Anyone who thinks twitter is going away anytime soon probably thinks the New York Times is still a profitable newspaper.

by Craig Ashley Russell on December 27, 2009 at 07:04 AM

If twittering ceases my faith in humanity will be restored.

by Jason Bresnehan on December 27, 2009 at 07:53 AM

This article is typical of an opinion piece from someone who is an outside observer of a cultural trend, without actually experiencing it from within.
I am sure research into usage levels, etc, were done by the author, but they are not included in the article as they would not support his claims.
Only an extremely small minority of users would stop using twitter based on Ruby Rose leaving the service.
This has been shown to be true many times before. Ruby is not the first higher profile person to leave twitter.
But twitter users are not primarily here just for the "celebrities".
As well, regurgitating the "fact" that no teenagers use Twitter highlights the fact that the Author does not use the service. If he did, he would know that "fact" has been proven wrong.
I would suggest, David, that you actually experience what you write about.
Just relying upon stats provided by the Print media and found on the internet, does not give enough insight to know what is actually going on.
This resistance to experience for oneself, is just another example of how print media is struggling to succeed in an online world.
And I see the same thing happening with you.
Next time - EXPERIENCE, then observe & report.

by scott on December 27, 2009 at 08:48 AM

As usual the SMH is late with commentary, and as usual out of touch. I hear breaking news first on Twitter: if the SMH is lucky they're reporting it an hour later, if it's tech news a week later...

by Andrew on December 27, 2009 at 09:18 AM

hahah!
wow. this article can only be satire. i almost thought it was serious. thinking ruby rose is a trendsetting figure in this country reveals you to be well and truly out of touch which reality. everyone knows that ruby rose is a nobody and an attention seeking tragedy who simply follows trends, and never sets them. she's only in the public eye because of her pr team and has nothing to contribute to society, and never has, just like most other australian celebrities we see plasted all over 20 to 1. sorry, but that culture of putting meaningless celebrities on a podium while figures that truly have contributed to australian society sit in the shadows makes us all a little sick!
haha, i'm probably going a little off track here but just had to write what everyone else was thinking.
back on topic, i was never on twitter and yes it was picked up quickly as other fads like the hula hoop, mainly by people who had nothing to contribute and so tweet about meaningless things. for these people yes it was pointless. but as for another source of seeing what particular people are up to at almost all points of the day (yes and for stalking haha) it's one of the most current and frequently updated resources we have. in fact you may notice that google has now introduced a live stream where if you type in a search term, it will reveal in real time what twitter nerds around the world are currently tweeting about the subject. while this will never take over concrete fact checked information, it's immediacy means that this type of stream is here to stay.
lastly i must correct the start of the article listing australia as an early adopter of technology. it's quite the opposite. australia has always been one of the last adopters of technology. for dvds and vcrs, australia was way behind the rest of the world. plus colour television was introduced to the world in the '50s and standard in the US by the mid '60s. it was only INTRODUCED to australia in 1975! i'd tweet to the world about that fact if i had a twitter account, but i don't. i prefer to spend my time online reading the sun herald.

by sam rathdowne on December 27, 2009 at 11:44 AM

You must be having a laugh David or just wanting to getting a rise from us all. After a little people powered search via Twitter, I noticed that your twitter handle has had little traction (twitter.com/essentialideas) and that Ruby Rose gave up Twitter for reasons other than the one's you indicate (http://ow.ly/Q2iu) and (http://ow.ly/Q2iO).
Twitter is indeed just one of the game changers thats empowering people, consumers and innovators alike. Its the new grapevine and just like I demonstrated it separates the genuine from the fake. For a more lively CONVERSATION join me on twiiter.com/Congo_. Otherwise, don't bother trying to understand this groundswell of change, it may scare you out of a job.
Actually, this comprehensive info should prove my point http://ow.ly/Q2sq.

DD replies: I notice that your source asserts this: "It's become the favorite service of TV, movie and music personalities. The most popular guy on Twitter is not Twitter's founder -- it's Ashton Kutcher. After him comes Britney Spears, Ellen DeGeneres, Barack Obama, and Oprah Winfrey. When all these people are into something, you can bet that thousands will follow."
And what do you mean "your twitter handle"? I have a Twitter handle?

by Congo on December 27, 2009 at 01:52 PM

David - my response is at my blog here.

http://bit.ly/8Xn8R3

Your comment above 'and what do you mean "your Twitter handle"?' does tend to imply your position in regards to the medium however.
Cheers,
Sam

by Sam Webster on December 27, 2009 at 10:28 PM

Time will tell David! Sadly, your commentary has not scratched the surface with the value of interaction, participation and collaboration that is created in the communities on twitter.
Twitter has connected communities of like minds on many topics from all over the world.
There are whole local groups in the city where this paper was published, who also meet up after finding common interests on twitter.
Community networks are just that about 'real' people, not 'celebrities' or journalists.
Agegroup statistics are not a proof of longevity either. Perhaps the adoption by predominantly people in the mid-age group is more to do with the ability to afford voice and data connections that are on mobile devices.
Personally, I found the article rather shallow, misinformed and biased. And, I found the article online (via a twitter link) not by reading a newspaper!
@frombecca

by Rebecca on December 27, 2009 at 10:44 PM

I came across your biased and unbalance article via Twitter, so there's some irony for you.
As an Aussie living in London, I keep in touch with friends and have developed contacts for my interests globally via Twitter. It has a completely different format and purpose than Facebook, and if you used it effectively you'd undertand that.
And for the record, I've no idea who this Ruby Rose person is, so she has neither global reach nor effective communication ability.

by Kanga_Rue on December 27, 2009 at 11:35 PM

Twitter Handle? The one you own but never use or bother to understand how. The one that has only 4 followers, embarrassing for a Journo. Regardless, the conversation has taken on a new form on a new medium. But I'll leave it up to your early adoption skills to find it.
Hope your enjoying the break ;-)
Congo

DD replies: In this case, the one somebody kindly set up without asking the named person if they might need it or want it. I will try to establish how to remove it.

by Congo on December 28, 2009 at 06:42 AM

I agree with the conclusions of this article but not the reasoning.
If you look at alexa.com, the popularity of Twitter has plateaued at 5% of total website hits, suggesting that it will fall in the future. Myspace has slipped behind Twitter. As for me, I'm on the winner (Facebook), with 29% of total website hits and still growing.
Twitter will always have its hardcore niche followers e.g. most famous celebs, politicians and religious leaders but won't be used by most common people like myself.
Disclaimer: I distinguish myself from the Arthur who commented earlier but doesn't contribute regularly on TM (all the arthur comments are mine).
...

by the arthur who regularly posts on TM on December 28, 2009 at 10:57 AM

Sorry but this is incredibly trashy journalism. Honestly one of the worst pieces of writing I have ever seen.
You support your opinions with NO evidence or research whatsoever. You can't simply make a claim that we adopted iPods faster than anyone in the western world. I am very skeptical of statements completely unsupported by facts.
Your only argument that twitter is dead is based on Ruby Rose's departure from the trend which AGAIN is not supported by any evidence of when or why. (SMH had articles on her 'nearly' leaving 9 months ago).
And who is your 'social researcher' and why should I take his word for anything? Not only does your piece lack evidence and research - it lacks authority and credibility.
I'm not defending twitter - personally I hate it - but if there is one thing I hate more than that it is terrible, gossip-driven, opinionated journalism.
Shame on you David. Shame on you SMH.

by Daniel on December 28, 2009 at 02:34 PM

I was going to send a fax to all of the above, but my machine broke about 6 months ago...

by d@gp on December 28, 2009 at 04:30 PM

Wow, where did all the Twitter fanboys come from? They're an abusive lot, don't you think TM? Well you've certainly pushed their buttons and the article is worthwhile for that alone.
"Twitter is brilliant, leave it alone, you can't even write you silly old man!" *Commence sobbing*

by Wendell on December 29, 2009 at 11:02 PM

The Sun-Herald

Who We Are

WHO WE ARE: Couldn't give a twit

COMMENTS

POST A COMMENT

Comments Terms & Conditions

RECENT ENTRIES

ARCHIVES