Twittering Toward Irrelevance
My first reaction to the ABC News press release about George Stephanopoulos’ “Twitterview” with Sen. John McCain - a “first,” according to the network publicist - was that Twitter was now getting perilously close to jumping the shark.
Then I got the transcript. It was pointless. You can read it here.
(Full disclosure: I am not on Twitter and have yet to glean anything of note from the Tweets I have followed; conferences or panel discussions.)
The “Tweeterview” between the This Week host and the 72-year-old senator from Arizona was disjointed and completely un-illuminating. The two tweeted about a host of deadly serious topics: Pakistan, Iran, AIG and Meghan McCain’s media feud with Ann Coulter and Laura Ingraham, offering no more than a smattering of syntactically challenged tweets on each, which is the point of Twitter.
But what is the point of news organizations? A long time ago, TV news was accused of lacking depth - as compared to the print media. Now that print is becoming extinct, TV (and the web) has an even bigger news hole to fill.
And while ABC News certainly pulls its weight (this week, they’re doing a “Where Things Stand” series on Iraq), the “Tweeterview” feels like a transparent attempt to horn in on another new media trend.
It’s a little desperate. Since Twitter is really just one more tool for self-promotion, perhaps it’s best to leave this one to the experts: high schoolers.
After all, the Sunday morning programs are among the last places where viewers can find actual back-and-forth between the media and politicians. There is holding feet to the fire, there are divergent viewpoints, there is informed discourse - much more than you’ll ever find on Twitter.
Bert commented:
I put in a comment and it wasn't posted. I didn't make a copy - how about being open here? And you can follow me on Twitter if you want, I'm open: @BertDecker
Bert commented:
Marissa, Looks like you didn't do the research a newspaper should do. Come on, let's have some depth. Don't take one tweetstream out of context to the whole.
If I was going to take the time here, I could write you a treatise on the good done on Twitter, the friends made, the relationships furthered, the great information quickly received. But I'm not going to take the time to convince you, I'm going to go back to Twitter.
Twitter is just one medium, but watch it - it will be one of the more powerful means of text and web communicating. And yes, face-to-face is always more powerful, more intense, and more seldom.
Ryan commented:
I'm sorry that you feel ABC's actions as "horning" in on a new media trend. The problem with your rejection of this particular medium is that ABC would be ignorant not to "horn" in on it. Twitter is the fastest growing communication tool we have today and it allows the public to interact with our politicians in a way we have never been able to before.
John commented:
I strongly disagree. ABC News is to be commended for taking news to an audience that is not watching their broadcasts. That is hardly a "little desperate." It is smart and innovative! And who would suggest that Twitter (or any other new media outlet) is a substitution for longer-form conversations and news? No, such channels augment, they don't supplant (at least not yet).
As to your suggestion that Twitter is a domain ruled by high schoolers, you are mistaken. Nielsen shows that the largest user segment on Twitter is adults 35-49. Perhaps some fact-checking would be in order, especially for someone dedicated to the news business?
New media channels will arise frequently in the coming years. Old school thinking as expressed in your piece is reflective of why we see erosion of traditional media audiences. With a little observation one can easily see that a significant number of adults want news and information on their terms, not a broadcast network's terms. Ignoring these consumers isn't selling out...it is stupid.
PO commented:
You used "toward" and not the commonly bastardized "towards" - and for that, I commend you!