SuperNews kicks twitter again...

Once again, the guys from SuperNews did a terrific take on twitter and the overall funny nature of the lack of understanding of what twitter is and how it works in terms of personal narrowcasting.


To me, this is quite funny, but it also seems to show the fact that most people do not get the inherent value of twitter - in terms of people being interested in diverse sets of information - and even with 140 character, some people (twitter celebrities, political celebrities, or Hollywood celebrities) will have a natural editorial style that some people will be attracted to.

Some read the Hollywood celebs because of their interest in the person, maybe their cause, what have you - heck, I am a follower of Shatner, Joss Whedon (@whedoneque), Eliza Dishku (@ElizaPatricia), @nathanfillion, Obama, and a bunch of other celebs - usually because they are interested in aspects of the celeb. I choose who I follow for various reasons, and assume that the reason waxes and wanes as time moves forward (for example, once DollHouse is renewed, I do not need to watch follow Joss as much).

I do not read them religiously (or all of the others I follow), and (blessedly) they do not post all the time. But, I do enjoy reading some of their posts, and others not.

So what if they are celebs - if I am interested in what they are saying, I read. if not, I eventually un-follow. Very democratic. Wouldn't it be nice if we could do this with our politicians?