Why using Twitter is like talking to my Mother-in-Law
By Roberta Rosenberg on May 21, 2008 in Occasional Rantings
photo credit: John Kratz
First, let’s just get this part said. I LOVE digital communications.
I have since the first time I read about France’s Minitel in the early 1980s. I got my first email address (JUNKMAIL) in 1986 via GEnie and met my husband online two years later on the same service. I even networked my Las Vegas divorce via unseen GEnie “pals” who arranged for an apartment, a car and all matter of necessities for my 6-week visit to Clark County. I was a “Section Leader” for the Religion and Sex forums on CompuServe for several years just to earn free online time.
So like I said, I get it. I also “get” Twitter. But getting it and liking it are two different things.
More and more, though, I’m finding I don’t like Twitter. Not because of the frequent outages. Not because it’s an incredible time-suck. Nope, that ain’t it.
What I don’t like is tweeting into the cyber wind, the Matrix-like vortex that hums incessant and unrelenting … and not getting a response.
I come from a direct response background. I’m trained to write copy, get it out there and wait for the orders to come in. I’ve done stand-up comedy. Tell your story and wait for your audience to laugh. I’ve trained my kids to answer when spoken to and to look me in the eye when responding.
Not so Twitter. Not so talking with my mother-in-law.
My mother-in-law is a very nice woman. She raised a fine son. For that, I’m more than grateful. But she’s a talker. A constant, nervous talker who finds any sort of silence, no matter how short, deafening and a little bit scary.
But being a chatterbug doesn’t make her like Twitter. What does is that she’ll talk even when she’s not sure anyone is actually listening.
My father-in-law will continue to read the newspaper while she chatters. My husband offers the occasional grunt in response, but to nothing specific she’s offered. My kids basically ignore the chatter, breaking into only to make a specific request of Grandma to play cards or to show her a picture they’ve drawn.
I used to feel badly that no one was paying attention. I’d sit and listen. I’d look for ways to make connection. But then I realized she didn’t need my connection, or in the very least, it just wasn’t required.
Talking without connection? What’s the point of that?
Exactly. From my personal comic/direct response frame of mind, what IS the point of communication without connection?
And who/why are all these people following me on Twitter? What pearls are they waiting for me to deliver?
Way too much pressure. I am not worthy.
Yes, I know that Twitter offers great opportunities for social interactivity, information distribution, etc. with unparalleled speed (when it’s not down, of course.) Recently, there’s been an explosion of news about Twitter’s reach and technology. For freelancers and home-based business owners, Twitter is like ALL-TALK radio and can be great, even comforting company.
But truth be told, I think I prefer the radio. Because I don’t expect the radio to talk back (especially through my personally crafted, lead-lined tin-foil hat. 
)
I’ll continue to keep my Twitter tweeting (and y’all are welcome to follow me as I do), but I’m going to have to adjust my expectations for the medium. Like my mother-in-law, I’ll need to content myself with the simple act of chat. If someone is actually paying attention and responds, well … I’ll just consider that a gift.
- Enjoyed this post? Get free updates by email or RSS
- Need a copy critique or a consult? Contact the Maven
- The ultimate guide to writing and designing effective landing pages - Marketing Sherpa’s Landing Page Handbook, 2008 (aff)
Michael Roach | May 21, 2008 | Reply
Interesting perspective on Twitter, Roberta. At this point, I’d have to say that I agree with you.
James Chartrand - Men with Pens | May 21, 2008 | Reply
My experience is the complete opposite. I joined, I talked to an empty room for about 15 minutes, and then people started talking back.
Twitter is a two-way street. You get what you put in. If you take a stance that you’re there to socialize, and you make efforts to reach out to others, they’ll reach back.
Soon, you won’t be talking to your mother-in-law anymore.
And hey - you can always talk to me
Roberta Rosenberg | May 21, 2008 | Reply
@Michael, I’m always happy for like-minded support , so thanks for that!
@James, Maybe you’re just way too scintillating than I am. Seriously, though, my goal is to find 1/the value of Twitter in general as a marketing vehicle because, hey, that’s what I do … and 2/the personal value of Twitter to me. At this point, I prefer IM because I already have a relationship with my IM’ers. The majority of my followers are UNK to me. I also don’t have 15 minutes just to kick around
Michael Roach | May 21, 2008 | Reply
@Roberta, Funny how Twitter has gotten everyone replying to people with a “@” though, isn’t it?
Or did I just not notice that before?
@James, When you say that you talked to an empty room, do you mean you ‘tweeted’ something with no followers? And people replied?
If that’s the case, then you’re definitely more scintillating than I am as well!
Roberta Rosenberg | May 21, 2008 | Reply
@Michael - Yes, I definitely think so. The @ is fast becoming regular comment syntax. At least until the next big thing comes along …
Lori | May 21, 2008 | Reply
Amen, Roberta! I’m not a Twitter person, either. Perhaps I don’t get the point of random thoughts streaming about me. How is this helping me exactly?
Rosemary | May 21, 2008 | Reply
Maybe your MIL keeps talking BECAUSE no-one is listening to her. Maybe she needs to feel heard and until she feels heard, she’ll keep talking.
Roberta Rosenberg | May 21, 2008 | Reply
@Lori - Oh, you want Twitter to help you?
Roberta Rosenberg | May 21, 2008 | Reply
@Rosemary - That’s definitely crossed my mind. But as she’s close to 80, I have to think she’s been in this mindset for a very long time. Thanks for your input!
Tom Chandler/Copywriter Underground | May 21, 2008 | Reply
I’m not exactly the message board type, so it’s likely twitter won’t become my reason for living.
I still look at a lot of social networking technologies with a Dot-bomb eye; most aren’t making any money, and monetizing them — without ruining them in the process — could prove troubling.
Be interesting to see what’s still around five years from now.
Tom Chandler/Copywriter Underground’s last blog post..Dell Decides One Ad Agency Better Than… 800??
Sonia Simone | May 21, 2008 | Reply
I really like Twitter, but I can see it’s not for everyone. I’m actually always a little surprised when people respond to what I tweet.
My little boy every once in awhile pipes up with “I’m here!” for no reason. Just affirming his existence. I think that’s what Twitter is for me.
I didn’t know you were on GEnie! Despite the many things that were awful about it, that was a community that really worked. I really miss the gardening roundtable to this day, I never found anything as good again.
Roberta Rosenberg | May 21, 2008 | Reply
@Tom - Be interesting to see if we’re still around in 5 years. I have a hankering to go to law school…
@Sonia - GEnie! I was the copywriter behind GEnie’s launch (I was freelancing with the ad agency that had the account.) Gamers loved it. Me? I mostly hung out in the chat rooms where my husband-to-be quickly dubbed me the “GEnie Homecoming Queen.”
Sarah McIver - The Global Copywriter | May 22, 2008 | Reply
I’m not a fan of Twitter either. I just tried it out as part of a comp that copyblogger was running and instantly disliked it.
To me it’s no different to a chat room. Except you have to wait for your comment to float to someone.
Ok then. ????
Just seems incredibly pointless to me. Am I missing something?
And I don’t know where this @ before words came from but I spose it’s quite useful.
Dave Ferguson | May 22, 2008 | Reply
To me, Twitter’s still in an early-adopter phase (much like Diigo, which I haven’t stirred myself to look at). For those who like this sort of thing, this is the sort of thing they like.
As with other social software, you have to find comfort and value for yourself. If that doesn’t come quickly, it needs to come vividly (”ah, NOW I get it”). Neither has happened for me yet, though that doesn’t keep Twitter users awake at night.
I don’t care much for the “@” before a name. Seems to me that @roberta: has no more value, and one more character, than Roberta: — still, it’s mostly harmless.
As for GEnie: I was in the alpha test; I worked for GEIS.
Dave Ferguson’s last blog post..We see with our brains
Roberta Rosenberg | May 22, 2008 | Reply
@Sarah, I think my dislike for Twitter is the lack of “I talk/You respond” … again, it’s about communication for connection. (I’m such a girl.) I’m also still thinking about the tweets that involve 2 people where I’m not part of the original conversation. So it’s like I see a running stream of joke punchlines without knowing the joke opening.
@Dave, I tell my kids I helped invent emoticons in the 1980s. My contribution was
- the big smile. My handle on GEnie was DirectAction. I worked with Boscobel Advertising who had the advertising account.
JoniB | May 24, 2008 | Reply
Hi Roberta!
I’m the type person who has not and will not join the popular trends just because “everyone is doing it!” I am not on My Space, Facebook, nor do I Twitter. I am not a technophobe (sp.)but I just don’t see the value of any of them. I still prefer picking up the phone to get that good old fashioned human on the other end.
Roberta Rosenberg | May 24, 2008 | Reply
@JoniB - Hi Joni, I must admit I’m usually initially entranced by every communications technology that comes along. As a marketer, I like to check the channels out myself and get a feel for the medium. While I get the benefits of Facebook - for which I only play Scrabulous - and Twitter, my jury is still out on the overall value to me personally. (Even the phone can be a hugely interruptive time suck
Caryn | Jun 3, 2008 | Reply
I was recently singing in the shower, Simon and Garfunkle’s “Sounds of Silence,” and it occurred to me how apropos some of it is. People, whether texting on their cellphones or by way of Twitter et al. “talking without speaking,… hearing without listening.” Listening to their iPods, on which are “songs that voices never shared” (except the pros who were paid to do so)…. Is it any wonder that technology doesn’t seem to cure anomie?
Caryn’s last blog post..Intentional prayer
Roberta Rosenberg | Jun 4, 2008 | Reply
@Caryn - Thanks for your comment. You bring up a very evocative and provocative point. Does the technology insulate ourselves from each other? Is it facsimile conversation as opposed to genuine?