Personally i'm with Lawrenson on Twitter. Do not understand it. Why do I care what somebody i've never met (and most likely never will meet) is doing?
Can't help but agree. I have had the odd glance, but really, in the great scheme of things, I couldn't give a monkey's.
It's not just that though, and only someone who hasn't used Twitter would have such an opinion of it. People don't just tweet about what they're doing, they also tweet about their opinions on certain things and spread news and information. The more time you spend listening to other people, and caring about what they have to say, the more you will learn.
The trouble is that doesn't happen. Generally, just like this forum, you like the things that agree with what you already thought. The German philosopher Karl Popper had this theory about debate and argument. Basically, you very rarely change your opinion when presented with a view that disagrees with your own. Rather, you go off and redefine and strengthen your own argument and represent it. The other person does likewise. The result being that you end up further apart. You can see that even on this forum. You very rarely see someone say, "Oh yeah' what a well presented argument. I hadn't thought of it that way etc etc". Its why so many of the debates can end with 'name calling'. The thing about Twitter and actually this site as well to a certain degree, is that people are arrogant enough to think that their opinions count more than someone else's does. Its what keeps up coming back and when someone agrees with us are ego's are pumped just a little more.
I am interested to hear what players say, but that's about it. Some people let their phones take over their lives. I was watching an exciting game of tennis on TV and was astonished how many young people were looking at their iphones (or whatever). They made the effort of going to Wimbledon and no doubt paid good money, yet allowed themselves to be distracted and distracted their friends around them by sharing what was on the phone. Also happens at break time at work...surrounded by human beings they prefer to look at screens....I suspect that the stuff they are reading isn't Neichze or political debate. And don't get me started on mothers ignoring their children because they'd rather share drivel with each other or, on a more personal note, people who use their phones in shop queues.
So thousands of people 'follow' Katie Price for her opinion on the Eurozone crisis? If I want news I read the FT or listen to 5 live. If I want an opinion i'll form my own having read analysis from a suitably qualified person in a format where they can use more than 140 characters to form an argument.
Why would someone use Twitter I hear you claim? Well, let me explain (I have no idea why I'm writing in rhyme). Firstly, for news. Major news stories break very quickly on Twitter and if something does happen, because of the immediate nature of Twitter you can find out quicker than on TV or on websites as it may take a while to update pages and unless you're watching a 24 hour news channel, then you'll have to wait for the next news broadcast anyway. For information about a particular company. A lot of companies and charities use Twitter to tweet about what's going on in the company, charities use it to Tweet about their work or upcoming fundraising events, companies use it for product launches or general information. To be involved in promotions. Lots of companies use Twitter for promotions so often you can get some kind of prize for retweeting a particular Tweet. Communicating directly with companies and individuals, more the former than the latter but depending on the company they may reply to tweets which are in the form of questions. For example just yesterday Boris Johnson gave people the opportunity to ask him questions and some of the questions he answered were quite random. For a laugh. There are quite a few 'joke' accounts, by which I mean they're meant to be humourous. For example parody accounts for various celebs and other people, usually preceded by the word not in their name (e.g. NotWillFarrell). Or various Star Wars characters. To be involved in events. Major event, whether television events or otherwise, generally trend and personally I think it's interesting to see what other people are thinking about a particular event. For example, the Euros would trend during each of the Euro games and you can see the general reaction, as well as giving your own opinion. Plus, some of the views may be funny or not. To show support for a particular person or company. Because you're interested in what they're saying.
I still haven't heard one reason that is convincing. Why do you need to know everything immediately? Surely, you should be working or studying or something not glued to your phone waiting for some important world event (or indeed joke) to unfold. Why can't it wait till you get home? I for one am not particularly interested in Will Farrell and so for me to actually log onto NOTwillfarrell completely beggars belief. Also, as Fran says, why can't people just enjoy an event without having to read other people's opinions all the time?. Its a bit like going on holiday and spending your whole time looking through a camera lens so that you can enjoy it when you get home.
I don't have a twitter account, but can find a link if something Saints related is happening. Thats where its use ends for me. The 'trending' we are constantly informed about is just annoying, & seems to centre around big-bloody-brother fans, & then theres the Jordans & other worthless celebs telling us they are having a cup of coffee, oh brother. Saying that, our Joe puts across a good point, so I'd certainly not judge others for using it, in fact that probably helps me keep up to date as this is the most used place on the Internet for me, my cyber home.
Twitter is probably a good tool if you use it wisely. It's the people who let it take over their lives that get me. Like being on a computer all the time.....oh!
I think this whole opinion thing is linked to the 'lets make TV interactive' drive. Personally I hate it when the news, or any program really, reads out viewers texts. Why do I care what Debby in Aldershot thinks about how George Osborne is running the economy? What credentials does Ray in Ilford have to comment on immigration policy? Just give me the news, not the ill informed opinions of non-entities.
What if you work in social media? I never said it couldn't, Twitter's still a good source for news so if you come in around 7pm after the news, go on Twitter and from what's trending you see major news stories which have occurred. You could go on the BBC or somewhere, but it's probably quicker. Will Ferrell's awesome, but that was just an example. There's lots of amusing accounts and parody accounts so you're bound to find something you consider amusing. Okay, then why do you post about football games on this forum as they happen? It's the same principle really. Yeah some of the trends are a bit annoying, it's mostly Justin Bieber and One Direction fans, but I guess if it makes them feel part of something, a like-minded community of individuals then that's fair enough I guess.
So just because Popper says it's human nature not to challenge your own opinions, you're not going to do so? Who cares how certain other people use it? The tool is there for you to do with it as you please. Again, who cares how other people use it? Are you being forced to follow Katie Price if you sign up for Twitter? It's just one of many ways to happen upon information, and I'm sure it wouldn't take so much time out of your day that you would no longer have time to read the FT and 5 Live. I use Twitter simply as a way of feeding loads of news through one place. I see a headline which might interest me, and click the link to be taken to the full article. Browsing Twitter itself probably takes no more than five minutes out of my day, and I never have to know what Katie Price is up to, or interact with the types of people who care about that sort of thing.
That I actually agree on. But I know so much and I have such great opinions that I just have to share them! To do otherwise would be to deny the world and especially all my followers who I love! This is me using irony, just in case you think I'm being serious. Having said that, there probably is an element of truth in that. I must think my opinion is worthwhile or I wouldn't bother to share it. And, by the way, that Popper thing.....you and I are just proving it. It almost always happens because our views on Twitter aren't just about Twitter but about all our other values and morals etc that lead us to form our Twitter views. It would quite simply be impossible for me to change your mind on Twitter and vica versa. That doesn't mean a healthy debate is a bad thing just don't expect it to lead to changing opinions.
Well anyone's opinion is worthwhile as long as it's not offensive to others. It doesn't necessarily mean they have an over-inflated ego.
Where has this idea that everyone's opinion is valid and must therefore be respected come from? It's demonstrably not true, but seems to be quoted by almost everyone (often it's a good sign that their opinion is worthless). Surely, if you know nothing about a subject, your opinion on it is not valid, and should not be respected by anybody.
Not one of my favourite philosophies. I used to dislike Twitter, and fought it for a long time, but eventually just decided to give it a try and found out that it could actually be pretty useful. The reason you're not going to change my opinion is not simply because I'm just predisposed to disagree with you, but because I actually use Twitter and I know for a fact that it is useful to me. Why would someone who uses Twitter be convinced by the opinions on Twitter of a person who doesn't use Twitter?
Experts aren't always right as they can sometimes have too much invested in what is being discussed or they are too close to the subject. An outsider with commonsense can see something they can't. Not often true, but often enough to warrant attention. Democracy is based on giving nonexperts voting rights.
I'm speaking in general terms, rather than about specific issues which someone may not know anything about. I guess you could say there's two levels of respect when you're talking about people's opinions: respect based on the merit of the opinion and the subject's knowledge of the subject matter and respect based on a person's right to give an opinion. You may not necessarily respect an opinion's merit, but that doesn't mean you don't respect their right to give that opinion (again unless it's offensive, etc).
It's still worth noting, though, and I say this in response both to you and to Wisescummer's comment about people texting in to news stations, that the opinions of the masses or certain cross-sections of society are worth being aware of. You don't have to respect everyone's opinion, but they are all valid. People vote based on moronic, bigoted opinions, and they generally live their lives a certain way because of those opinions. Knowing these sorts of things gives you a vague idea of where society is headed, what regular people are annoyed about at the current time and how their resulting actions may affect all of us in the future.
