Really 68%?
Maybe I'm being dumb (wouldn't be the first time, won't be the last) but are they really suggesting that 4,180.50 is 68% of 20,000? Or is there another way I'm meant to be reading that.
Writing about Twitter is the journalistic equivalent of eating the fluff from your navel. The posh papers love it. Menopausal middle-aged hacks love it. The BBC is obsessed with it. Instead of telling us something we didn't know before, Twitter makes churnalism so easy, it practically automates the entire job. The rest of the …
Is this article implying the whole Twitfest isnt going to do anything because it didn't raise much money? I got the impression that this one site was one part of a larger thing, and that was their contribution. Whose target is $1m in a month? Not twestival.fm obviously as the picture shows. So you're dooming the whole thing based on one poor result on one site. Lacklustre reporting. Were you looking at your navel when you wrote this?
@James Green: There is indeed.
"Maybe I'm being dumb (wouldn't be the first time, won't be the last) but are they really suggesting that 4,180.50 is 68% of 20,000? Or is there another way I'm meant to be reading that."
It took me a moment, but it means that 68% of the $4,180.50 has been paid - $2,842.74. Or 14.2% of the target $20k. Lots of charities do this - when you see Comic Relief saying they've reached £15 bazillion, very little of that is "paid" at the time, most of it is "pledged", so they count it, but haven't got the money in the bank. The cheque's in the post, as it were...
No - but it could still be read two ways.
Their goal is 20K
They have received pledges of 4180.50 of which 68% have been paid (i.e. they actually have 2842.74).
OR
They have received 4180.50 which is 68% of their total pledges (er.. 6147.79 maybe?)
Perhaps Paris is better at figures...
"Twitter is a bit of a charity-case itself: both technically and financially, it's a lost cause. That's plain to everybody, it seems, except the journalists who use it and who can't stop Twittering about Twitter."
Normally I think Andrew Orlowski is a troll.
But on this occasion I couldn't agree with him more.
Twitter is intrusive and pointless.
I like Twitter. I've got back in touch with people that I'd lost contact with because of Twitter and have also met some interesting people though it as well.
I also went to a Twestival last night, it was in a pub I'd never been to before, and it was one of the best pubs I've been in for a long time. I even bumped into a few people in the pub that I'd not seen in years. I'm going back there for some more real ale tonight :-)
So it's not intrusive or pointless for me. I wonder how many of the anti-Twitter crowd have actually tried using it?
Why am I thinking of baby elephants?
Perfect example on The Daily Gush, erm Wired today:
"The nerds hate it, because they don't get it. It's out of their control," explained Howard Lindzon, of StockTwits, which won the best finance Twitter award. "If you can't say it in 140 characters, you probably don't have much to say. Those are the people who don't like it."
I just don't get the financial model of Twitter - no advertising, no subscriptions and no sponsorship. It's like they're rolling around naked on piles of VC cash before shovelling it into a furnace, giggling insanely as more money goes up in smoke.
I can just imagine the folks at Twitter trying to negotiate for cheaper SMS....
Twitter: ...and we believe that we add value to your network, so we would like lots and lots of free text messages please.
Network: Door's that way, make sure it doesn't hit your arse on the way out !
[Sound of Twitter execs running down the corridor, chased by starving attack dogs]
Paris, because even she has a better grasp of real-world economics than most Web 2.0 outfits.
Is that a real interview? Just wondering, I don't live in UK so I don't know if The Day Today is for real or not. Man that was pretty rough, but I must say hilarious. The icing on the cake is at the end where he's just like "....... Thank you." and gets ready for the next story.
Your hatchet job on twitter is a little unfair. There are many people who use and enjoy twitter who do not fit into your category of unfortunates who are "addicted" to twitter. As a Twestival organiser, I would say that a lot of good work went into this and who cares how much money was raised. It was a worthwhile and different event.
Now get back to your terminal.
As one of the Twestival organisers I have been disappointed to read this latest post on the Twestivals. I believe it to be both badly researched and provocative for no real reason.
Whatever your view on Twitter as a social media platform, or its potential to create an adequate revenue model to sustain its place in the world, the Twestivals in themselves were an innocent and inspired event seeking to raise funds for a good cause.
Sparked by one message over the Twitter network it saw take up in over 175 locations with local volunteers on the ground doing all the organisation and acquiring guests, entertainment and sponsorship for their respective events. In each case ALL money raised was DIRECT to the supported charity - Charity:Water.
The global target for the event was $1m coming from a variety of different streams -Twestival.fm, The Twestival Events, Tip Joy Donations, Ticket Bookings etc etc. Already the amounts coming in FAR exceed the amounts mentioned in this story which were obviously picked to try and back up a rather weak and hopeless story that read like an old man's grumpy moan rather than decent blogging, reporting or commentary.
In my own case I worked with a team of volunteers to put on one of the smaller events (in terms of worldwide) in Cornwall. We saw approx. 50 guests, we had sponsorship from a number of businesses in the area and we provided a night of entertainment, networking etc for our guests.
Our guests were not just geeks or techs wondering around glued to their mobile's Twittering - they represented a diverse group of business people, students, media people, politicians, artists, designers and so on.
Whatever you thoughts - I believe the volunteers across the globe worked tirelessly over a period just 4 weeks to run charity events in aid of one charity without seeking to market Twitter, obtain personal glory or to line their own pockets. In itself that represents an achievement and I am more than happy that we were a part of this innovative and interesting event.
Aren (Cornwall Twestival Organiser)
http://www.twitter.com/arengrimshaw
http://cornwall.twestival.com
four grand? is that is? and it's in dollars and not real money, that makes it about three grand if that! A bunch of mates and I have been shaking buckets on street corners on and off for a few years and we've raised 8 grand since christmas and over a quarter of a million since we started keeping count ( http://www.ragabonds.org.uk/totals.php )
Methinks this is all about 'social media' types slapping themselves on the back while drinking branded vodka and congratulating themselves for being so f*cking with it
Sorry Andrew but Twestival London was a great event and to lambast Twitter in this way shows a complete ignorance of the platforms potential. Twitter exploits the power of digital text in a way unseen in social networks so far to the point that if Twitter didn't exist, we would have to invent it. Which in fact is exactly what has been done when it has gone down. (Which is still too often.)
The fact that it doesn't have a business model is frightening but doesn't damn the premise or the point. The Internet needs services like twitter to glue its amazing facilities for hyperlinks and RSS together with personal human communication.
This enables effective mass p2p learning, cultivates collaboration and renders what is a growing behemoth of information, a social playground for learning.
Although there was a little bit of 'how many followers do you have?' at the event, that shouldn't distract from the positives.
@thewikiartist
I was one of the organisers of the Edinburgh event. We raised over £3,500 on the night. Your badly researched and unnecessarily hostile article does a disservice to the good will of all the many people who gave their time and money to make Twestival a success. A retraction and an apology would not go amiss.
Woo £3,500 really great work and once the deductions have been made to "pay" the charity organisers I'm sure there'll be enough for a few bottles of Thunderbird and some cardboard boxes.
Those people may have given their time and money but that doesn't make your twitfest a success.
*NEWFLASH* Monday morning $4,541.00 so that's a whopping additional £360.50 over the entire weekend.
It would appear that you haven't allowed the facts to interfere with a good story.
Early indications are that the event was extremely successful.
Reading tweets by the organiser, @amanda, London alone "smashed its goal and raised £10k! Enough to fund 3.5 wells for 2500+ people for 20 years."
I would assume that worldwide figures are still being calculated, but you may end up looking a bit silly.
I was the organiser of Manchester Twestival - we raised £4,000 at our city event. But you know, actually it doesn't really matter, what is just pathetic is the fact that you would even slag off people trying to raise money for a brilliant cause. I just don't get it. You think Twitter is a waste of time, an echo chamber, blah blah, fine but get a life - you know you're going to come out of this smelling like dirt don't you?
@Jen: "Your comments on Twestival are totally misleading! Twestival.fm is a tiny part of the overall event "
Ha ha. Is this whole story a prank to show how Twitter users are morons? If so it seems to be working.
Jen, why didn't you read the article or even any of the comments? Are you on Twitter because you can't read at all?
Twunts deserve all the abuse they get.
That really made me laugh, thank you. Feeling a bit tired after some late night work but your inane comment made me realise that there's at least one more person far worse off than I am.
I'm sure you pulled that second to last paragraph from a random buzz word generator. A killer.
I just hope you weren't being serious. Now that would be really worrying.
I'm sorry Joshua. I enjoy using Twitter, it is good fun, but "...enables effective mass p2p learning, cultivates collaboration and renders what is a growing behemoth of information, a social playground for learning" is meaningless, 'web 2.0' new-media bollocks.
Mass peer-to-peer learning? Do me a favour.
On one hand, you have a pointless, restrictive and downright shite piece of web 2.0 bollocks.
On the other, you have a journalist who's too up his own arse to admit that his article can easily be interpreted wrongly.
It strongly suggests that $4k has been raised for a $1m target. There's no two interpretations.
Andrew, just bite the bullet and put a footnote on, making clear the difference between twestival.fm and twestival. (or was that twatival? I can't remember)
And then please run a poll deciding on the best way to describe twitter users: Twatters or Twidiots.
Regville scout troop raised £100 from a jumble sale tor Comic Relief. .. hahaha Comic Relief is doomed to fail because £100 is a lame amount. and thats why the scouts suck.
(was that less than 140 chars?)
like alcohol, or the IT Crowd, some get it, some dont. However i do have to laugh now Reghardware is on Twitter.
I twitter not because its a media circus but because its like an easy version of IRC that the whole family understand...
And believe it or not I do fear that Twitter is doomed to Fail it appears to have no revenue generation ability most posts are through 3rd party apps without advertising capability, and once adverts appear instream like spam people will leave/move on.
anon twitterer..
What hell is this twitter nonsense anyway? No, I don't want an answer, I'm not interested, obviously something like what "blogging" used to be, just a buzzword for something very ordinary. Oh, you've written a web page and updated it daily, well fucking done. So I'm imagining Twitter is some kind of mass chatroom? Lovely. I've never really understood what Web 2.0 is but I'm starting to understand now I think. It's all just bullshit isn't it?
The Day Today though, splendid :o)
It's me again (AC), I decided to see what the font of all knowledge had to say and yeah, it's a chatroom type thing, or shoutbox I guess (not that I'm telling anyone that, I just didn't know what it was). Anyhoo, the funniest part of reading (more like glancing) about it was the wiki tag...
"This article is written like an advertisement. Please help rewrite this article from a neutral point of view. For blatant advertising that would require a fundamental rewrite to become encyclopedic, use {{db-spam}} to mark for speedy deletion. (February 2009)"
lmao
The 'FAIL' image in the article said target 20,000, not 1m. You can't be any clearer than that.
Enough times people see what they want to see and disregard the rest, i.e. confirmation bias. Whilst it could be argued that the author presented the situation in a way that reflected his own opinion of Twitter, there's no denying that lots of people have similarly chosen to only extract from the story those facts and figures which reinforce their countering arguments.
In short, this article has made a mockery of those people, because anybody with half a brain can see the point the story is trying to make, whether they agree with it or not.
I'm thinking that if all the people who spent time organising the events had have donated a tenner to charity instead they'd have raised more money...
I'm all in favour of charitable work but fair to see why people are getting so defensive when it's clear that the time an effort but in haven't justified the end result.
In fact, I think this is call for a challenge... can the reg whip up more money than twestival.fm managed? I'll pledge £20 to get the ball rolling!