So, have you 'tweeted' today? Such is the speed with which Internet trends take hold of the public imagination that Twitter has, within just a few months, become a fixture of news, radio and entertainment media; a widely-discussed new phenomenon of online expression. In earlier generations, the only opportunity to touch the hem of celebrity was to write off for a signed photo of Maggie Philbin from Swap Shop. Now anyone can instantly peer into the life of the 'slebs' with one click.
So what is Twitter? And, more to the point, what is it for? It has been described as 'micro-blogging' or a 'status update' for a watching world. A user - a member of the 'Twitterati' or 'Twittersphere' - shares 140 characters' worth of thoughts at a given moment, and can attach photos or links to the 'tweet'. Simply to persist with these regular text messages requires a particular dogged determination on the part of those who tweet.
In this, they are certainly helped if they possess a special combination of narcissism and pithy wordplay. Unsurprising then that gagmeisters Stephen Fry, Graham 'Father Ted' Linehan and Jimmy Carr are some of the most prolific proponents with an enthusiastic army of devotees. Actually, in Twitter parlance, they have 'Followers' - make of that what you will.
The history of human communication can be characterised as an accelerating proliferation of new techniques for saying things as our desire to speak and express ourselves finds ever more specialist ways of doing so; the letter, the 'calling card', the postcard, the fax, the text, and email. Each has carved out an appropriate niche function, as the Manchester boss who last year fired his staff by text message found out.
Perhaps it might be helpful to consider our modes of expression as taking two forms - messages and broadcasts. An email, a text and a letter are messages. A web page, a book and a tweet are broadcasts. The range of intended recipients is different, and conventions and laws have grown up around whether the expression is public or private. Many of us only send messages, but the Internet has made anyone into a potential broadcaster, for better or worse. Each has limitations.
All communications fall into one category or the other - all, that is, except the Bible. In providing his inspired word, God has broadcast his saving message to humanity as a whole, the words carrying a clear, simple message, rich in analogies, stories, poems and records of historical events. But, uniquely, through the work of the Holy Spirit, any one person who prayerfully opens up the Bible discovers God speaking his timeless truth into their individual lives. The power of the word lies in the design of divine communication.
‘My sheep listen to my voice, and I know them, and they follow me. I give them eternal life, and they will never perish; no one will snatch them from my hand' (John 10:27).
John Lee
Links
For a brief history of the development of social network services, and a consideration of emerging trends, click here
Wired magazine features news and reviews of the latest advances in technology and how it shapes our lives. Visit the website here
Comments
Twitter is not necessarily something that requires a 'special combination of narcissism and pithy wordplay'. That is certainly true of a large number of twitterati (though many lack the pithy wordplay bit), but many of us use it for quickly sharing a snippet of news, disseminating information (in particular links to interesting articles online), quickly getting feedback, etc. I tweeted this article 'John Lee on Twitter in LICC's 'Connecting with Culture' this week. http://tr.im/jBvJ' and 14 people have already followed the link to read it. I think that's rather useful and not particularly narcissistic.
Oh dear. You really don't get it, do you John? May I explain? Two words: twitter connects. Truly, it's that simple. But more to the point, and I apologise for needing to use three words now: twitter connects people. I owe this next bit to Grant Leboff, who presented a seminar on the changing face of marketing to booksellers at the London Book Fair this week. You talk about two forms of communication, messages and broadcasts. But there's more to it than that: with social networking everything has changed. Print gave us mass communication, one to many. TV, radio and static web pages took that to the next level. But now we've hit Web 2.0: interactive internet, many to many. Twitter is another step in the internet's evolution. It's not so much micro-blogging as blogging on speed. It's a conversation; and it's wide open. Dogged determination? No: just a desire to communicate. Please don't diss it: join in.
I think you've got Twitter wrong. Have you actually used it? Twitter is not simply about broadcast, though that may be part of it. I have been on Twitter for a few weeks now and have quickly become part of a network which includes bishops, clergy, those interested in spirituality, sport, music and a whole range of other interests.It has been a very useful source of resources & reflections over the Easter period but it is also a place where one can share the excitement of the drama of a football match e.g. Chelsea v Liverpool a couple of weeks ago. Twitter can be abused and some have tried to use it as a marketing tool. It is not free of spam but by unfollowing someone you can avoid this. Recently I followed someone doing the Alpha course and found myself praying for them in their journey of faith. Another person in New Zealand who has been a great source of worship resources lost his daughter in a tragic accident. I've never met this person but I and I am sure many other twitterers held the family in prayer. During Good Friday a group of people in New York tweeted the passion story. All the publicity has been about the celebs twittering but Twitter is far more than that. Can I suggest that if you are going to critique an aspect of culture you do actually try and engage with it and understand it. Reading this article gave me the impression the writer really just wanted to use Twitter as a hook on which to hang a statement about the Bible.
There was a time when I'd forward on all of my connecting-with-culture e-mails to my non-christian friends - such was their level of connectedness and profoundness. They weren't preachy or tried to draw every subject back to a chosen bible passage - they were simple and challenging. But that's all changed over the past 18 months, and now I very rarely enjoy them myself, less forward them on. Today's is no exception. Not so much as connecting with culture as bashing it. I'm no twitter fan, I don't use it - but the tone of the post is quite critical of those who do. I have noticed similar trends in previous posts. Maybe there is scope to have a look at the posts of a while back and see how much they've changed in tone? :/
Thanks for the comments, all. Interesting assumptions about my use of social networking! Now let's take this somewhere more tricky. I stand by my analysis of the two modes of communication ('is it to ONE or is it to MANY?). Web2.0 and the expansion of user-generated online content turns everyone into a broadcaster. For instance, people posting here might think they are leaving messages, but in fact they are broadcasting. Paul Carr (here - http://tinyurl.com/d974b9) doesn't use the term 'integrity', but clearly recognises that the 'always on' public nature of the digital world means that everything we say is open to scrutiny. Which introduces us to a fascinating, if slightly scary idea for Christians - In history, the preacher/teacher was the only broadcaster (to 'many'), leaving the rest of us to engage in personal evangelistic messages (to 'one'). This is how the church works out the Great Commission. We see that the Bible gives a clear warning to those who would teach, eg James 3:1. Does Web2.0 imply that our online statements (to 'many', by default) are broadcasts and therefore 'teaching', or 'preaching'? That is a sobering thought. What Facebook, Twitter and so on do is to allow us to switch modes from messaging to broadcasting very easily in an effort to build networks quickly. That after all is how networking has always been done. At the very least, we should be aware of a need to have the integrity which Christ demands of us - potentially as teachers. The medium might be the message, but the message is still the message too.
Date:
2009-04-25 12:24:40
Author:
John Lee