Sept. 30--I have terrible news for people who don't like reading more than two short sentences. Twitter officials are thinking about increasing the so
Sorry about that, I ran out of characters. Twitter officials are thinking about increasing the social media site's 140-character limit. I th
Darn it.
Twitter officials are thinking about increasing the social media site's 140-character limit. This is a bad idea. (Whew. Made it that time.)
For the unfortunate few who have not sold their souls -- and the time they used to spend with their families -- to Twitter, the site's defining characteristic is that whatever a user writes has to be 140 characters or less. That's it. That's a tweet. Those are the rules.
It's wonderful because it's just enough space to say something angrily self-righteous yet not enough space that you feel burdened to provide information that might support your inflammatory statement. It allows us to communicate in a context-free zone, promoting online arguments that, like a Thneed from Dr. Seuss' "The Lorax," everyone, EVERYONE, EVERYONE needs!
But now the higher-ups at Twitter are threatening the sanctity of traditional tweets.
The tech news site Re/code reported Tuesday that Twitter "is building a new product that will allow users to share tweets that are longer than the company's 140-character limit." The story said the company's interim CEO Jack Dorsey "is apparently supportive of a potential change, a bold stance and yet another sign that he isn't simply keeping the CEO seat warm until Twitter finds someone permanent."
The Wall Street Journal, citing people familiar with Twitter's planning, later reported: "One of the main issues the company is grappling with is by how much it should extend the limit and how that should look, a decision that could alter the basic Twitter experience, these people said. One camp is in favor of simply increasing it by 10 or so characters, while another camp would rather take the time to devote resources to building a rich publishing platform that could perhaps be monetized one day."
A rich publishing platform? If I wanted rich detail, I'd read a ... what are those things called? ... a big paper stack covered by thicker paper ... a bock ... bork ... BOOK!
I come to Twitter for brevity, not breadth. If they enlargerate the tweet space, some of our word lines will have to begin sense making. #tyranny
It's pretty simple, folks:
More space = more context = greater understanding = less yelling.
If I may provide an appropriate tweetnalysis: "Boo space! Yay yelling! #fight #fight #fight"
If Twitter expands its character limit, we'll be robbed of thought distillations like this, from Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley: "14yrs ago terrorists attacked killing 3000 of us Like 12/7/41 "lives in infamy" so will 9/11 2dayJapanese friendly Jihadists want kill us"
That prompted impassioned responses like: "what does this mean?" "I have so many questions" and "Someone call the idiot whisperer."
Grassley did not need more characters. In fact, I would argue that we, as a nation, are better off because he was limited to 140 spaces. Given more room, who knows how many other "friendly Jihadists want kill us" he might have named.
Tweets from other users, plucked at random from the fertile thought fields of Twitter, include:
"CLUCK-A-DOOOODLE-DOOOOOO!!! Good morning
Guardians of the #Constitution!
NOW is time to DEFEND THE REPUBLIC! #TEAparty
#tcot
#tlot"
"love too loose followers when I post twets about abortion which is a hella legal and absolutely great thing for all females #StandWithPP"
And, of course:
"Multiple
#Benghazi
Committees established by @GOP=
political COVER 4 #Hillary;
so @TheDemocrats
can say: "5 committees found nothing" #tcot"
One can easily respond to any of the above tweets with a simple "YOUR AN IDIOT!!.!" or "Shut up, you (liberal/conservative) mORON!!" And that leads to some high-quality bickering, devoid of any clunky facts, evidence or rationale.
But if we start giving people more room to express themselves on Twitter, it's possible someone will eventually make a reasonable point. I don't know about you guys, but that is NOT what I go to the Internet to find.
If I wanted thoughtfulness, I would engage in a mouth-moving, sound-making talky thingy with another human being person. (Kidding, I would never actually do that. LOL.)
If anything, I think Twitter should reduce its character limit. Maybe give people just enough room to type the subject they're commenting on followed by either "GOOD!" or "BAD!"
For example:
"Kim Davis met with Pope. BAD!"
"Trump. GOOD!"
"Burritos. GOOD!"
"Exercise. BAD!"
Then we could respond with crisp anger blasts like: "STUPID!" "LEFTIST!" "NUT!" and "GROSS!"
Make tweets 30 characters or less and you alleviate the risk of context-creep. That will exacerbate our outrage and help the Internet reach peak vitriol.
I will leave you with a wonderful quote from Dr. Seuss: "I yelled at the Lorax, 'Now listen here, Dad! All you do is yap-yap and say 'Bad! B
Aw geez, not this again.
This should fit: "I yelled at the Lorax, 'Now listen here, Dad! All you do is yap-yap and say "Bad! Bad! Bad! Bad!"'"
That's Twitter in a nutshell. Why would we change a thing?
rhuppke@tribpub.com
