How Oprah hurts Twitter
Posted: May 1st, 2009 | Author: Karolijn | Filed under: Pop Culture, Social Media, Twitter | Tags: Pop Culture, Social Media, Twitter | 2 Comments »Ever since celebrities and news organizations hopped on the Twitter bandwagon, new signups have skyrocketed. The blue bird has been featured on news networks, late night talk shows, and probably even found its way into a few sitcoms.
But with that popularity has come a backlash. People are leaving Twitter at a rate higher than MySpace. It’s been called narcissistic, boring, useless…
I blame Oprah.
Okay, Oprah doesn’t deserve that much credit.
But it seems that the popular media icons that are pimping Twitter right now are the same ones that are generating the popular misunderstanding about what it’s all about.
I don’t presume to be able to dictate how any tool is used, sometimes the best tools were never invented for their best purposes – duct tape makes a fine prom dress. But what makes Twitter unique is its simplicity.
No matter how you use it, Twitter is about dialogue. Dialogue requires engagement, and without engagement, Twitter IS silly and useless.
The majority of these popular media icons, companies and brands that are trying to use Twitter are using it as a broadcast medium. They aren’t engaging with their followers, they are talking at them.
I suspect the average experience of a new Twitter user goes something like this.
- Sign up
- Add some celebrities, news networks and a few friends that have previously gone through this list
- Make a few tweets about what they’re doing today – much like a Facebook status line
- Refollow spambots, companies and “Social Media Experts” that are following 6000 people and have 24 followers
- Get bored
- Leave
- Tell friends how stupid and boring Twitter is
With pop media recruiting for Twitter so heavily, it’s no wonder this experience is so common.
Following celebrities and companies on Twitter is like signing up to be on their mailing lists. At first it might seem interesting, but impersonal and irrelevant messages quickly become noise.
Oprah can get the attention of millions, but without actively participating, she has no chance of holding it in an engagement-driven medium.
It’s not entirely her fault that she can’t engage. Celebrities can attract hundreds of thousands of followers extremely quickly. It would be just as difficult for them to engage with their followers as it would be to get to know everyone in a mob of fans.
Celebrities and companies are frequently the least-engaging users on Twitter and yet with their ability to reach out to so many people, they have become the role-models for how it’s used.
60% of new users don’t ‘get it’ because it isn’t very exciting to be just one in a mob or on a mailing list. And who would care what THEY have to say the way people care about what OPRAH has to say?
I wouldn’t be surprised to see celebrities and popular personalities abandoning their accounts sooner than later. Without being able to engage, they are acting as spokespeople for a product they don’t – and often can’t – use themselves.
That must feel silly and useless for them too.
While I agree with most of your post, I don’t think I would say that Oprah *hurts* Twitter.
Sure the huge amounts of people who join and quit aren’t good for Twitter’s stats. But they aren’t harming the people who already use and love Twitter.
Plus, with her bringing in hundreds of thousands of new users, there’s a good chance that at least a few of them will see the real value of the site and become true members of the community.
I agree. Oprah doesn’t personally impact me as an existing user.
But first impressions matter.
I wonder how many people that may have been valuable contributors to the community get turned off because they don’t see it used in a way that is relevant to them.