Twitter is NOT a Micro-Blog

Sometimes a word or notion is fired in the kiln of conventional wisdom and becomes forever set. Unless, and until, A. Fine blogger takes up the charge and forces some rethinking!

Twitter is known as a micro-blog. I think that this is completely wrong. Twitter should be considered a social network.

Here’s why:

According to Wikipedia, micro-blogs operate just like blogs, only in smaller bursts. Twitter is included in the Wikipedia entry as a micro-blog. Someone, or a group of people, write blogs that audiences read. A blog is part of a broader, online conversation through links to other blogs or news articles and in the comments stream. Nonetheless, fundamentally, someone writes and others read.

An online social network like Facebook is a neighborhood where lots of people share news and photos, connect with one another, meet new friends, organize to do things together online or on land. No one is in charge, there is no beginning and end to conversations. Twitter is just such a neighborhood.

Here is an excerpt of a conversation on Twitter that I read the other day:

Jeff Jarvis: Wikipedia is wrong (GASP!). It is not my birthday. Thanks anyway.

Jeff Jarvis: Can somebody change my Wikipedia birthday to July 15? I don’t want to violate rules and do it myself (silly as that is).

Andy Carvin: @jeffjarvis actually it’s kosher if you do it to correct a factual error and leave a note on the discussion page for transparency sake.

I thought it was a neat, little exchange of information and knowledge, the kind one would hear in the hallway at a conference or at a water cooler in an office (although not my office, then I’d have to get dressed!) It was not a short blog post followed by a comment.

So, what’s the big deal, A. Fine, what does it matter if Twitter is misnomered? Here’s the deal, what we call a tool often dictates how people use it. That’s why it’s conventional wisdom, it is a settled discussion. Not everyone, certainly not people who are very facile with the social media toolkit will use a tool the way that Wikipedia determines, but, newcomers, people who are less certain may. If an organization, or person, is unsure of what to do on Twitter, I would rather than they think about is as a neighborhood and an ongoing conversation than a blog post.

In my experience, Twitter is best used as a mechanism for conversations among a lot of people. It’s a fantastic organizing tools for events like Twestival. Most of all, Twitter is a neighborhood where interesting ideas and exchanges are happening that we can participate in, or watch, just as we would at a neighborhood diner.

Or maybe it’s something entirely new that hasn’t been named yet. I’m open to suggestions!

The Wiki That Isn’t on Change.gov

Working Wikily, a paper and idea crafted by The Monitor Institute and the David and Lucile Packard Foundation (although originally coined by Lucy Bernholz), describes a collaborative way of working that is inclusive and transparent.

The Obama administration is putting these ideas to work using wikis and public policy on their Change.gov site reports Nancy Scola. Launched yesterday, the health care discussion with two members of the transition team, Dr. Dora Hughes and Lauren Aronson, on a wiki on Change.gov.  This certainly strikes me as more transparent and constructive than the black hole of resumes with which the site started.

I like the opening statement on the page, “Our policy teams will be sharing new developments with you, the American people, and asking for feedback. It’s up to you to respond.”  In particular, the “it’s up to you to respond.” part putting the onus on us, citizens, to participate is great.  Brava!

Here’s the part that I don’t like about this wiki:  it’s not a wiki.

This is a blog post, think Huffington Post not Wikipedia.  Here’s a wiki:  http://votereport.pbwiki.com/FrontPage.  This is what we used to organize Twitter Vote report and you can see the different pages that participants created throughout the project on the right side:  such as partners, media outreach, project tracker, user stories.  Volunteers created these pages, posted content, others revised and edited it.

Perhaps I’d let this technical issue go if the opening question were better. “What don’t we like about the healthcare system” is waaaaayyyyy too broad as a starter.  Here, I’ll give you all the answers and then we can move on:  It’s too expensive, not portable and doesn’t provide things we need, like medications, inexpensively.

OK, so it’s not a wiki and the opening question doesn’t work, is that all I’ve got?  Nope, here’s the big one, and the one that stops too many efforts from being truly transparent: Drs. Hughs and Aronson posted a question, invited us to wrestle with it, and . . . And, what?  What are they going to do with this conversation.  Without a commitment to listening it runs the risk of becoming a long thread that starts out with long, thoughtful responses (and these really are that so far) that will ultimately degenerate into something less civil and run the risk of petering out all together. Why not extend the challenge by posing several questions that people can begin to wrestle with (e.g. what are you willing to pay for health care? what are the pros and cons of a government-run system?  how can we reduce the significant liability risks that health care providers have now?) and asking people to wrestle with them online, and engaging groups like Public Agenda and Everyday Democracy to facilitate local disucssions and develop real proposals and solutions?

You had us at wiki, Change.gov, now really challenge and engage us, please!

Sichuan Earthquake Reported in Real Time

Earlier this morning, a major earthquake rocked a large part of China. Immediate reports began to appear via Twitter and video postings. Global Voices has an outstanding post here on the variety of ways that news from China has come in over the Net.

The earthquake is already up on wikipedia, here.

And this is just one of many videos online capturing the quake in real time:

Mapping Worldwide Thought

I’m a very visual person, and although I have absolutely no sense of direction, I love looking at maps. I love seeing the relationship of one street to another, where cities are located within a state and, of course, how nations fit into the jigsaw puzzle of the world (is Uzbeckistan really that big?)

So, I was thrilled yesterday when my friend Phil shared with me a site called Wikipedia Vision. It’s an almost real time visual presentation of where around the world people are making edits and updates to Wikipedia. As I watched people and their editing processes pop up around the world (although primarily in the US and the UK) I was struck by two thoughts: 1) I am watching the world shrink before my eyes, and 2) what is we were all working on the same problem or issue at the same time? Imagine if all of these smart, committed people decided to take a day or a week or a month and tackle, say, climate change by contributing, wrestling with and vetting ideas on a wiki.

Sometimes I feel so grateful to be living in the Connected Age!