I opened a Twitter account a few days ago. There are already a bunch of strangers following me. I don't know how celebrities do this; it feels a bit creepy.
Today I logged on only to find that "Twitter is Over Capacity" which means that "too many tweets" are occurring. Where is everyone getting all this time to tweet?
I debated joining Twitter. There's not enough time to maintain my website and blog. Maybe this is the universe's way of telling me to fly away, little tweety bird, and make my nest elsewhere.
Belonging to a social network site seems necessary if one is to have an internet presence. Other than Twitter, I also belong to LinkedIn, which touts itself as a professional/career networking site. I don't pursue people on LinkedIn. I sought out a few people in the beginning; now sometimes I get an invite to join someone's LinkedIn circle. I only have 16 of my own connections, but like an incestuous social pyramid scheme, I've ended up with a network of over 36,700 connections. I think I should drop some of my own connections. Can you imagine the catering bill if sudden death should befall me and 36,700 people were to show up at my funeral? My husband would kill me.
I've been invited to join Facebook and MySpace, the most popular social networking sites. I felt awkward refusing well-intentioned friends. Both sites seem so picture driven--too much an invasion of my personal space. Too much of me out there. Apparently Facebook's largest growing sector of users is women over 55, and Facebook now claims to have 200 million users. Am I really going to be missed if I don't join? Or am I going to be missing out if I don't join? Or once I do join, will the next social networking fad come along and then I'll have to manage my email, my website, my blog, my Twitter account, my LinkedIn account, a new outdated Facebook account, etc., etc., etc. Where does it end? It sounds like a recipe for instilling OCD within oneself. And when does online socializing begin to compete with actual socializing?
Orkut is Google's attempt to encroach upon the social networking world that's currently dominated by the top two. It's already popular in Brazil and India, but "Orkut"? The name baffles me. It makes me think of a Pizza Hut type chain that specializes in killer whale fast food. Mini Cheese and Orca Pizzas. Orca Burgers. Orca Nuggets. Orca Shakes. Orca Smoothies. Orca Lattes. Google? Really. "Orkut?" Orkut you kidding me? Call me, Google. In a pinch I could have thrown you "Yougle" and that took about two seconds. Please don't say market research confirmed Orkut? Even Whoville would have been better than that.
To Join Yahoo 360 you have to be 18 years old, unlike most of the other sites which set the age limit at 13 or 14 years old (too young of course). Clearly age limits are a good thing, but enforcing them is the important thing. Online, it's too easy to lie about age, or anything for that matter, which makes me so uneasy about all these sites. It's a commonly held truth that people embellish resumes, what would you call what some people do on these sites. Perjury?
There are tons of other sites that have been launched in other countries that are gaining popularity here: Bebo (from the UK), Friendster (from Asia), and Netlog (from Europe) where you join "clans." That could be fun if the requirement is to wear a kilt, learn to play the Scottish bagpipes, and talk like Shrek.
Domination over who can enlist the most users is always a big topic regarding social networking websites. MySpace has lost its edge; Facebook is gaining. Just a few days ago, Ashton Kutcher garnered a million followers on Twitter in a battle against CNN--all for a good cause--to help fight malaria in Africa by urging tweeters to purchase mosquito nets. He exploited his own celebrity, became his own paparazzi, and baited people into donating to his cause. He proved the inherent and powerful marketing capabilities of social networking sites. That Ashton used his social networking site to further his social activism was brilliant. I have no hesitancies about people using social networking sites to better the world. But about the marketing aspect--that's what a lot of my followers are trying to do to me: sell me stuff. A lot of the tweets are akin to one-line Ebay ads.
For those of us who aren't celebrities and don't have that clout of a Kutcher, CNN, or some savvy marketing department seemingly innocently using the site posing as your average-joe-tweeter (all the while to snag customers), what's all the online socializing about anyway?
Is it the perfect nexus between narcissism and voyeurism? And what does it mean when your social network is so busy that there's no room for you to log on? Is that like being snubbed by your "live" friends? Isn't the whole reason for joining these communities to negate the possibility of that very thing from ever happening? We've all been ostracized in our "live" social circles. We've all been left off the party invite list, but to have a social networking website give you the boot? That feels like getting slapped in the face by 36,700 friend connections, or perhaps like being dropped from a high-maintenance clique you felt hesitant about joining in the first place, or maybe more aptly like somehow serendipitously ending up on a "do not tweet" list that bans internet marketing solicitors from contacting you.
Carole Flynn is the author of Literary Itinerary and Literary Unleashed.
Comments