Twitter is great for watching uninformed panics unfold live

LaurelPapworth said:

monkey see, monkey do. The mainstream media in Australia is escalating swineflu to the stratosphere - zero cases here yet. Front page of every paper scaring everyone - I heard 'pandemic' used 5 times in two sentences, though I think they've been asked to tone it down now. At least on twitter the discussions frequently are lighthearted in tone as well - #Hamthrax.

valencio said:

socialspacestation said:

Alex and Jerry - I agree with both your posts. I typically always reference the creator and always link back to the source. In this case the link back is present on my blog (didn't transfer to Social Media Today) but I forgot to reference the source.

JerryB said:

You're right, Alex.  Andrew should have given a hat tip to http://www.xkcd.com/574/ which appears to be the original source.  Stealing is common on the web but it's nice to give credit where credit is due.

ErikGoldhar said:

The cream will always rise to the top.  Twitter threads can be amusing but if you really want to find subject authorities they are out there.  Trust is a slow process.  I don't read 1 post from some stranger and classify him/her as an expert.  I see a tweet that sparks an interest, I follow, I read, I learn, I read more, I trust, I read more, I'm reinforced.

MikeMcDermott said:

Jerry,

Your concern is well founded.

Even before "the internets" there were "sheeple" that took rumors and ran with them. There are instances during the French Revolution, Witch-hunting here in the US, and others instances where whole communities reacted badly upon half-truths.
Even in a fully-informed universe powered with the Internet there is cause to be alarmed when information is disseminated that has the possibility to cause harm.
I think a large threat in communities like Twitter has cropped up thanks to @oprah and @aplusk which has introduced noobs to the social medium without actually understanding its use.

Just today on THE VIEW, Joy Bayhar <sp> said that she wanted the Twitter president to remove all fake celebrity accounts and build a better way for people to certify who is who. She is afraid that someone may register an account with a name similar to hers and then pretend to be her.

Twitter was never about authenticated users in the past. It was about creating a medium for all people with all voices to speak with eachother and share information with those they find interesting. If you like to follow the dialogue of the fake Joy Bayhar and not the real Joy Bayhar, you should be allowed to do so.

I am afraid that @Ev will start to move Twitter to be more what Hollywood wants it to be versus what he initially intended.

 

JerryB said:

Irreverent and irrelevant, I don't mind, Michael.  What concerns me is the potential for spreading misinformation that is dangerous--particularly in emergencies--or incites otherwise normal people to irrational or even criminal behavior.  I'm thinking specifically now of all the crazy and erroneous people shooting people and doctors killing patients stories that came out of New Orleans during Hurricane Katrina which, thankfully, was before Twitter.

MikeMcDermott said:

That is a key element of Social Media like Twitter, it can and will be irreverent and irrelevant, just like having a discussion with 100 random people at the airport.

Twitter is the antithesis to wikipedia. Wiki's are supposed to be based in knowledge, twitter is random by design.

Mike McDermott
Community Manager
Bash Foo Social Media
http://bashfoo.org

JerryB said:

This is extremely funny but at heart it raises some serious questions about "citizen" journalism and confirms, for me, at least, that crowds are almost never wise and that all technology is only as safe and as useful as the people who use it.