When Twitter first started, or at least when I first became aware of it, I signed up briefly looked at it followed one person, made one tweet, something to the affect of "what is this anyway", never got a response and left it at that. My understanding of it grew, albeit superficially, and I just wrote it off as a narcissistic tool for celebrities and the bored.
Then, about a year or so ago, while in Grad School for an MAT, one of my professors professed that while she didn't enjoy twitter she had begrudgingly become more involved with it because it was a good networking tool.
Huh? Is what I thought. The "social site" where people blurt out snapshots of whatever they are thinking at that moment? Charlie Sheen uses it to abuse people, I thought. Clearly, I was thinking smallish. I went back and looked at my twitter account I started to 'follow' more people. What I saw didn't make me any more inclined to get on board. From the people I was now following it looked like they were following a great deal more people than were following them. This, to me meant, that no one really cared to hear their short blurbs about whatever.
It wasn't until I began this Ed class that I started to see more possibility, well that and the fact that we were forced to do it, and began to take a more active participation in it. One of the first things that happened was that, by assignment, I joined and edchat. No one showed up. Well, the moderator was there, and two people chimed in to say one thing before going silent and, I imagine, away. So, the moderator and I just chatted haltingly (on my part) on for about half an hour about various educational topics, why each of us had wanted to teach and the like. To my astonishment, she turned out to be a vice principle in a district and school that I wanted to teach. Wow-zer.
I started to realize that my conception of what twitter is and does, rather what it could do, even if it wasn't doing it now, was really small. So, as I have worked towards improving my use, I have also worked towards improving my knowledge of it as well.
Point in case. In his article 'The 10 types of Twitterers And How To Tame Their Tweets" (link below), Steve Faktor explores 10 different types of twitter users, or accounts, and discusses how they might manage to improve their use of the tool. I'm actually going to make this a two parter since I have to catch a plane for work in about an hour SO, this first post will be about his description of the types and where I think I, and some of us in the class, fit in.
He cites:
1. The Undead - accounts that exist but inactive
2. Protector- people who keep their tweets so private that they may be missing the point
3. Chirper - This is me at the moment, so I will write a bit about it below.
4. The Fan the enthusiastic follower who retweets a lot and one day hopes to be retweeted and maybe even followed
5. The Networker Since this is where I would like to go, I will also write more about this below
6. The scouts I'm still trying to understand this one but it seems these are the people that closely follow passions and retweet news and information about them. If you have read my other blogs the good reads section, these would be the type of tribesmen that the book Tribes talks about.
7. Stars- obviously the people like Lady Gaga, Charlie Sheen and the like. He states that "the top 1000 twitter accounts have over 3 billion followers".
8. E-lebrities like stars but not as famous, these people usually make their living by providing for their audience. Comedians, tech gurus, etc...
9. Media Co media and entertainment companies
10. Organizations companies that spend large amounts of money in order to take advantage of social media's mass of people. Starbucks, NFL, etc..
This list ins't surprising in the least, now that I have read it.
For my part, I am solidly in the Chirper position. He says this about them:
"Chirper – Chirpers range from stay at home moms to bored teens to professionals. Their one common characteristic is a lack of strategy. They have a vague idea that they might need or should use Twitter, but no clue why. Many abandon it after getting few responses or followers. Others hang around, sending Tweets out like prayers – in case they get heard. After all, it seems harmless, requires little effort, and nothing in their house is on fire. Their tweets range from new recipes to American Idol votes to Staples coupons. Twitter is the Chirper’s repository for dull deliberations that would otherwise bore their cat to death. A smaller, younger group of over-Chirpers reveal way too much. Eventually their tweets will be called ‘Exhibit A’."
I am at that point where I realize that there is a benefit but I am sort of tweeting in a general direction and am, at this point, more of a consumer than an affective lead on anything. Obviously, I am interested in using twitter for education and I would like to move over to the realm of participant. I have started to shift towards what he describes as the networker. I believe the key point in this description is the fact that not much can really be conveyed in 140 characters. It is the connection to something larger, be it ideas, papers, lesson plans, etc..., that enable twitter to be used to share. But then there are Chats. These operate much like the old chat rooms and I can see this as working just like they did, focusing on specific subjects, sharing information, websites, and things are both valueless and valuable. More than the networking itself, I really see a value in the prospect of sharing.
Networker – The Networker is the most ambitious, optimistic and sometimes, delusional Twitterer. They believe Twitter is important to their career and invest time in finding and following people who might advance it. Many are genuinely interested in others’ ideas. Others are angling for influencers to follow them back. Some Networkers are so persistent they rack up tens of thousands of tweets, follows, and reciprocal followers. Some get a boost from working for a hot brand or having a relevant title. What sometimes vexes and disappoints top Networkers is their massive time commitment and big stats produce little real influence. Twitter’s dirty little secret is that real influence almost never happens in 140 character nibbles. It must happen in the real world first – building a great company, writing a bestseller, saving Darfur. Twitter happens to be a good place to manage existing influence.Networkers represent the best and worst of Twitter. Some know how to use it to find clients, connect with peers, and arrange real-life meetings. They use tools like Hootsuite to control their feed like it’s the Starship Enterprise. Others stoop to buying followers to puff up the veneer of influence. Or, they aggressively un-follow people who don’t follow back. A few post incessantly about social media itself, creating an excruciating echo chamber – like having every show on NBC be about having a show on NBC. (Though tweeting this article is a noble, un-ironic exception.)