140 Characters
I hate Twitter. It’s not that I mind all the Twits with their memes and trends and links. I don’t even mind people pretending to “follow” someone in hopes that one more person will get updates on their bladder infection. What I hate is the 140 character limit.
The entire Twitterverse revolves around this limitation. #tags, @people, URLs, everything is shoehorned into140 characters. Worst of all, it works. You can see everything quickly, run through a dozen updates in a minute, easy. It’s so good that people have come to expect it.
But HELLO! Who made the last 140 character contribution to humanity? Can you imagine restricting Robert Frost to 140 characters?
Two roads
and I
looked down one
Then took the other,
Because it was grassy.
I doubted I’d come back.
Two roads diverged and I
took one.
#goodpoem
What if Lincoln had been forced to deliver the Gettysburg Address in 140 characters?
Years ago men were equal. Now we war.
Brave men have power.
The world will forget us. We have freedom of, by, for the people.
#empancipateme!
If Lincoln had given that speech, Virginia would still be a slave state. The extra 1,300 characters weren’t wasted.
The thing that truly astonishes me is just how offensive people manage to be in under 140 characters:
@sarahlynn: I would put you in rehab to help you with your eating disorder . </3
People ACTUALLY tweet this stuff! Don’t you think your friend will be a little mad if they see it? It gets better when they respond:
gf got a puppy. #hate puppies. They turn into dogs. Now marrying her means marrying the dog too. Why am I in this relationship?
@sugadaddy: OMW, Larry are you breaking up with me? Over Twitter?
I’m amused. Is anyone else amused? But if Twitter has this big of an impact on your, you’re using it wrong.
The world is about living a life, not tweeting about it.
Though, throughout the sum total of humanity, is it not better to be creating written text than not? No matter what the syntax, The use of printed word to communicate is important. Beyond that, attacking the 140 word limit is attacking novelty, The reason for short messages was because twitter was developed prior to the all-out-explosion of the smart phone, and the way it changed the landscape of the Internet permanently. The users who stayed with twitter enjoyed the uniqueness of the message limit. The users wanted to limit in this way because It challenged the way they were communicating. If twitter were to change it’s limit it would alienate it’s core customers. It has little to do with pontificating or writing anything of merit. If you have something more important to say, people post a link to a blog.
And simply, people enjoy it and it (generally) doesn’t hurt anyone.
Oh, about the Gettysburg Address. It had very little impact on the course of the war. Lee’s inability to perform in the Northern Campaign really turned the tides of the war. In 1863, the British were waiting for a truly decisive Southern Victory to decide the case of Public recognition for the C.S.A. Though we know now it was likely they never would, Lee and Davis felt that a huge victory on Northern Soil would bring them the European support they so desperately needed. After severe stomach issues that left him bedridden and confused for the majority of the battle, his cavalry taking the day off, and losing the majority of his infantry in the suicide mission inappropriately dubbed “Pickett’s Charge” (Pickett had little to do with it and was instead a scapegoat that lost his whole command) The fighting was at a standstill. The only way Virginia would still be a slave state would be if they had never seceded.
January 7, 2012 at 11:30 am
Your comment is 1660 characters over the limit. Here, let me shorten it for you:
Humanity is attacking the Internet. Twitter has little merit. If you have something important to say, Virginia would still be a slave state.
January 7, 2012 at 12:30 pm
Llama, you need a favicon. Like, do you expect us to take you seriously without a colorful little picture on the browser tab?
January 7, 2012 at 4:21 pm
Disclaimer: I’ve never tweeted in my life. I’ve seen the website no more than twice. But I think facebook used to have a similar character limit, too (although I don’t remember exactly what it was).
Some people enjoy the challenge of being more concise with some of their thoughts. I’ve said & seen some pretty profound things in the 160 characters of a text. (Using all my vowels, too, thank-you-very-much.)
I’m undecided if this character limit phenomenon is a cause or result of short attention spans. In the translator’s note (or the introduction?) to the Barnes & Noble version of “Count of Monte Cristo,” it is admitted that things are pared down because of the differences between intended audiences. I would quote it exactly, but I don’t have it with me, but the condensed version is: people want more action than description on the rare occassion they read anything over 140 characters.
January 9, 2012 at 7:55 am
(I was going to leave my own comment, Seashmore segways into my though so perfectly, it seemed better to reply.)
The average attention span and reading comprehension are plummeting. Maybe more than 140 characters is more than–
SQUIRREL!
(and that’s Tweetable, too.
January 11, 2012 at 12:03 am