Comments on: Twitter Needs Two Channels

By: Emergencies and Social Media « Media Bullseye – A New Media and Communications Magazine

Fri, 12 Feb 2010 20:40:55 +0000

[...] Brogan, a well-known social media and technology veteran, suggested in his blog that Twitter develop a second channel for [...]

By: My Social Media Strategy and fitting in Posterous | Matt Wilson, young entrepreneur, Looking to help every young entrepreneur on the planet @MattWilsonTV

Fri, 08 May 2009 16:05:11 +0000

[...] puts your micro-blogging efforts on two platforms like Chris Brogan suggested “Twitter Needs Two Channels“. You can communicate within “the noise” of Twitter, but then all your pictures, [...]

By: Emmaline

Emmaline — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 23:34:13 +0000

Good day! The babes are here! This is my best site to visit. I make sure I am alone in case I get too hot. Post your favorite link here.

By: Joel Drapper

Joel Drapper — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 11:59:23 +0000

I was just talking to a friend about this the other day. I hope they do bring out this feature.

By: Jack Repenning

Jack Repenning — Tue, 16 Dec 2008 21:49:16 +0000

@susan kuhn frost (et al): there are a couple sites that will reconstruct a thread for you. one is tweader.com. copy the permalink for the tweet, or just the number at its end (the “status ID”), and paste at http://tweader.com

By: susan kuhn frost

susan kuhn frost — Tue, 16 Dec 2008 15:07:38 +0000

Christy, the only work-around I have seen to follow a conversation is this: select a word string in the tweet that intrigues you and then search for it at http://search.twitter.com, the search menu at the bottom of the screen. One of the options in the results will be “show coversation.” That will take you back through the tweets between those two people.

By: Christy

Christy — Thu, 11 Dec 2008 18:13:51 +0000

It’s an interesting idea, but I feel that it removes the “social” aspect of social media. If I only want to know what noteworthy things you have to say, I read your blog. Twitter is all about those connections you make around the non-noteworthy things. Enjoying the same type of coffee, sharing a birthday, having similar experiences with family members – these are how personal relationships are built. It’s one of the reasons I don’t aspire to following as many people as you do. I can’t imagine trying to follow the massive brain dump you have access to! It’s like being able to hear what everyone is thinking and trying to sort out what you want/need to know.

As others have mentioned, there’s the additional problem of defining what is a “common” and what is a “platform” tweet. I can’t imagine it would be all that useful a breakdown in the end, especially with thousands of streams coming in.

The only change I’d make to Twitter is the ability to thread tweets. I am forever searching backward to find out what inspired an interesting response!

By: Snow Vandemore

Snow Vandemore — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 18:22:08 +0000

To quote Winston Churchill — ““The simplest things are often the truest.”

The human brain is an amazing tool in that we can take in an inordinate amount of information at a brief glance and determine what is pertinent to our lives and what is not. We already have two, four, six channels — as many as a relatively intelligent person can manage — simply by thinking, then choosing. I don’t want an application making those decisions for me. I might be missing something that later proves to be a diamond, a gem, in a stream of muck.

By: Sopan Greene

Sopan Greene — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 17:51:45 +0000

When I read the title and began to read this article I agreed with you Chris, but the more I look at how I get value on Twitter I have to support the one channel option. The blending of the commons and the informative data is the secret sauce for Twitter.

We have access to real time national and international conversations, benefit from crowd sourcing and connect deeper to experts like you by reading tweets about people’s kids, joys, frustrations and at times irrelevant musings. Every time we read a tweet that makes us smile or laugh we’re further endeared to our Twitter friends and deriving more value from the medium.

Besides, having two channels would add yet another channel to monitor in our information overwhelm / time deprived lives. It would be one more thing we’d be wishing could be aggregated.

@sopan

By: Snow Vandemore

Snow Vandemore — Sun, 07 Dec 2008 19:47:10 +0000

I made a comment to one of my followers this morning about Twittergroups. I said the site looked cheesy and personally, I didn’t see the point. I like twitter for it’s diversity — I don’t want to be grouped with a bunch of other people who think, or think they think, like me. I want to share and converse with people who are not like me. That’s how I learn and that’s exciting to me.

Too many api’s spoils the bunch — in that respect, I agree with you. Twitter is a phenomenon unto itself. Piling on different applications and spins just complicates the essence of what is great about the original product. Sequels and remakes, like Die Hard 2, are never as good as the real thing. Twitter is twitter. Tomorrow, it will be something like twitter, but better. But that’s for you social media geniuses to figure out. I’ll just be along for the ride. :)