See here: http://www.cnbc.com/id/32446935
I couldn't resist posting this after the other sometimes heated thread at http://forums.cnet.com/5208-10152_102-0.html?threadID=353073&tag=forums06;forum-threads
Note that I have created a Twitter account, and somehow found that I'm following "Jerky.com"'s tweets (I've bought some good jerky from them, but can't account for the automatic following yet. I guess that happened after I had Twitter scour my contact list.) I'm going to be experimenting more with Twitter as I get time. I'm sure I can help get that 40 percent of pointless babbling up a percentage point or two on my own , lol.
Anyway, take the study above for what it's worth, and note that it's posted all in good fun.
I use Twitter for entertainment purposes only. If I want news and information I go to relevant sites or read my rss feeds.
I don't understand the people that say they get all of their info from Twitter.
A lot of people do get the news through Twitter. Companies like Time and CNN tweet (I hate that word!) out the news. Also, many twitter accounts are just simple mirrors of a site's RSS feed using Twitterfeed, a service that monitors an RSS feed and tweets (did I mention I hated that word?) what it sees. I use Twitter for both. I follow CNN and Time, but also Tom, Molly, and Jason.
That is funny no body I follow does "Pointless Babble" at all.
At least it says less than 1 in 10 are pass along worthy. I can't say anyone I follow really says anything earth shattering or pass along worthy. I mean what do we classify "Starting to record BOL" as?
What percentage of studies are a waste of time and money.
Good one.
*angrily rolls up sleeves*
Heh - no, not really.
Though - Danah Boyd had a pretty good and smart reaction to this study here:
http://www.zephoria.org/thoughts/archives/2009/08/16/twitter_pointle.html
But the author does go to some lengths to say that Twitter shouldn't be judged on the basis of being primarily a news source but rather a social tool, which is in opposition to some others' take on it. I can see that it's mostly social, with the capability to disseminate news as an adjunct function.
I have to say that at first glance I thought I saw something else when the author used the word "phatic". Good grief, what would Freud say (in 140 characters or less)?
i deem his article pointless babble. your move news guy!
-karl
I love to know what people are having for lunch or if they just did number one or number two.
That's not pointless to me.
| Forum legend: | |
| Locked thread | |
| Moderator | |
![]() |
CNET staff |
![]() |
Samsung staff |
| Norton Authorized Support team | |
| AVG staff | |
| Windows Outreach team | |
![]() |
Dell staff |
| Intel staff | |