Does Twitter Really Live Up To All Its Hype?
Posted: Tuesday, June 09, 2009
by Asher Ricard
Twitter has been the hottest topic on the net for the past few months with so-called expert after expert insisting that in order to have any kind of success on the internet, you have to be "tweeting."
A Harvard study just released is cutting holes in that theory. The study found that just ten percent of its users are responsible for making up 90 percent of the content on Twitter.
It isn't to say that Twitter isn't a great outlet. They do have a lot of users, over 10 million to be exact.
But for some reason, Twitter is not having a good retention rate. Nielson is another group who has found the same results studying Twitter. While they have recorded explosive growth over the last year, they have seen a trend of people not returning to the site.
It brings up the question, Why? I think comes down to something as simples as where Facebook has succeeded, Twitter has failed.
It is hard to find friends on Twitter because of a lack of extensive profiles. Facebook makes it easy through networks, high schools, colleges, etc.
Also on Twitter, conversations seem to be more one-way as opposed to two-way like on Facebook. Because of this, I think Twitter is more designed for businesses and organizations despite its marketing towards friends and family.
I personally love the concept of Twitter. However, I am one of those statistics. Simply, for me, I did not or don't return often because of lack of time. Facebook is easier for me and was the first site I had signed up to participate in. After going to Facebook during the day, there is no time left for Twitter.
There are some positives to Twitter. One positive is the new Tweetdeck. I think this solves my issue of lack of time because it simultaneously shows both Twitter and Facebook statuses at the same time. You can also update your own status on both networks at the same time.
Another positive, I think, is individuals like the idea of following celebrities and Twitter makes that a reality. Ashton Kutcher is of course the most famous Twitterer recently competing with CNN to have the most followers. Celebrities such as Rain Wilson, Shaq and other sport greats are many who are showing a more accessible personal side to fans on Twitter.
What does this study mean for Twitter? Maybe it is just something as simple as tweaking their marketing from a social network between family, co-workers and friends to a conversation with the world or celebs. Maybe it is something more of extending profile pages or making it easier to find people.
The good news is that Twitter is still growing by record numbers. The question they have to ask themselves, is how do we keep our new users active and returning? What are your thoughts? Do you Twitter?
This Article has been viewed 143 times. (Not updated in real-time.)
Top-level comments on this article: (3 total)I recently joined Twitter, at the suggestion of a long-lost couple friend. The woman half of the friendship made it sound like we could keep in touch better than with Facebook, which I won't join because of its suspicious T.O.S. Now that I'm a Twitter member, I hardly ever see either regular "tweets," and those that do appear seem banal, superficial. Blogs can be interesting, as an extension of journalism or essays. Blogs have depth and purpose (potentially, anyway). Social networking schemes, not so much.
Anonymous Rex
Nice article! No Twitter for me, Facebook takes up enough of my time and as far as celebrities...I'll catch em on TV
I love Twitter. Sometimes when I get on Facebook I get overwhelmed by all my Friends and all the silly apps, games, and invites. Twitter is simple and easy. Plus I just can't get enough of following celebs...Great article btw
We want your comments! If you can read this, you don't have javascript enabled, so you can't use this comment system. Please enable javascript.