michael_nielsen

Politics on Twitter is particularly strange. Many otherwise extremely bright people suffer from Dunning-Krugeritis on this: they think they're insightful, but constantly tweet recycled talking points I can hear in a million other places.

(Yes, I'm guilty of all of this on occasion! Working on it!)

When determining whether I want to follow someone, I look at their last 10 or tweets. Do those Tweets make me happy? Feel awe? Feel more optimistic? Feel the urge to do something? Teach me something strange and wonderful? Reveal a new world? I'll almost certainly follow.

The amazing thing - the truly incredible thing - that Twitter reveals is that there are effectively an infinite number of such people in the world. Of course, I've always known it, and in big cities it's easy to experience. But T makes it such a routinely lived experience.

If they make me angry, or feel outrage, or feel sad... well, I'll be very, very cautious in following. Those aren't what I usually want in my life. That's not to say there aren't very insightful people I follow like this. But I am cautious.

Some people retort that this means I'm not paying attention to important events. Maybe. But I think Twitter is a bad medium for paying attention to many classes of upsetting, important events, and so I choose other media.

As an example, I'd much rather read the IPCC report (and backing papers) than listen to people argue about climate change on Twitter. I don't mean that as a theoretical example, I mean: I've read a bunch of the IPCC report, & supporting materials. It's a 100x use of my time.

I generally dislike self-righteous claims there is a right way to do Twitter. A common one is people who say that if you're not following people you disagree with, you're doing Twitter wrong. Rubbish. It's fine to just follow stuff you love.