I am yet to be entirely convinced of the usefulness of Twitter. While I pretty willingly jumped on the bandwagon for previous social networking entities, the beauty of having a Myspace or a Facebook was that it enabled you to connect with people in a meaningful way (well, as meaningful as such connections get on the Internet). Twitter, with its limited-character postings and one-dimensional “following” relationships seemed more like a narcissist’s haven, a place where people could feel important because of their electronic soapboxes.
Yet still, there remain a large contingency of people out there who believe Twitter to be the next big thing, or perhaps even the current big thing for that matter. Every now and then, a situation rolls along , and people vigorously point at people “Tweeting” about critical current events and exclaim that the entire system is thereby justified for existing. This phenomenon was seen last summer during the Iranian Protests, when (as you can see in the linked article) protesters were able to communicate with people outside the country regarding the conditions on the ground in major cities like Tehran.
Now, following the horrendous earthquake in Haiti, Twitter-defenders are once again citing this disaster as a way to quickly spread news and calls for aid to a large, global audience. In this blog post from The Wall Street Journal, an increased in “tweets” regarding the earthquake has been cited as a means by which people are raising awareness, complete with celebrities encouraging their followers to donate to charities set up to relieve those devastated by the quake. Other Twitter activity included reactions to inflammatory comments made by Rev. Pat Robertson as well as the death of soul singer Teddy Pendergrassm.
I feel that people who are citing Twitter’s usefulness during this time of crisis are overstating the effect that it is actually having. First of all, Twitter boasts only 60 million accounts worldwide, and though this is a large number, we have to acknowledge that some of these accounts are not used with the same type of regularity as those cited in The Wall Street Journal article. That being said, the people who have received news of the quake through Twitter have also received word through the barrage of media coverage over the last several days. Seeing as Twitter is a resource used by only the most tech-savvy of people: it’s irrational to think a person who Tweeted about Haiti heard about the earthquake exclusively from Twitter.
This brings up the biggest glaring difference between the Iranian protests and the situation in Haiti. Because the quake destroyed so much infrastructure (infrastructure that sadly wasn’t sufficient in the first place), it is and will likely remain difficult for a person to have access to the Internet, or even cell service for that matter. This means that any and all Tweets regarding Haiti are coming from people who are “re-Tweeting” information about the crisis itself, as opposed to persons providing on-the-ground updates on the devastation. While rallying people to give financial backing to aid efforts is certainly an admirable cause, I have little patience for people who are using this natural disaster to raise Twitter up on a pedestal as being a ground-breaking source of information on the crisis as a whole. The real heroes are the people on the ground in Haiti, providing much-needed assistance to the beleaguered Haitians, not the people sitting behind their computers thousands of miles away offering support in 160 characters (or less).