COMMENTS
I think Twitter is a Social network and then some..
We all socialize on Twitter, on some level, hence it is a social network. However, one can also argue that most of us (in addition to socializing) use Twitter as a Distribution platform. In sum, it is both, which why Twitter is such a great tool for marketers, socialists and, to a very large extent, news media.
I guess it is both!
No disrespect intended, Evan Williams; but, your intentions/definition of your own service (TWITTER), has grown w-a-y beyond what you might have originally planned/thought.
Twitter has - exploded - within both distribution platform and social network intentions/expectations.
Don't "sell" yourself short. While I'm not addicted to Twitter, I have gleaned immensely important and diverse information and have connected with an incredibly wide-ranging group of folks and followers.
Therefore, it should be apparent, I come down on the side of ... both.
Cheers!
(~~~)D
Jessan
I have always said that Twitter is a hybrid. It is part social networking and part blogging. It certainly has a social aspect to it. It certainly has a strong connection aspect to it.
Twitter is a social network blog...
What do you think? Is Twitter best used as a social network or a content distribution platform?
BOTH!
Twitter is multiplataform, multifunction.
Like as a content distribution is one way to see and I liked yout explanation. :)
Twitter seems to have some elements that are unique. It can function as a Facebook-junior, or mini-Delicious, or even substitute some functionality of the e-mail. Plus, it is defined as a micro-blogging platform – technically, a miniature-blog. However, Twitter does have unique feature which will remain in the future because they are useful. I was thinking about these characteristics and could formulate five: <a href="http://interactivesnack.wordpress.com/2009/06/20/twitter-%e2%80%93-reality-and-potential/
">Twitter Reality and Potential http://interactivesnack.wordpress.com/2009/06/20/twitter-%e2%80%93-reality-and-potential/
They will probably remain even if Twitter itself disappears, but it will be interesting to see in which form…
It's both. Both avenues are great ways to utilize the service. Does socializing take a bit of a hit? Absolutely. But without that component you wouldn't be able to have an effective distribution system.
Why on earth is this an either/or question? The fact that it is both is exactly what makes it so popular among its evangelists. Those that can flow seamlessly between using it as both a broadcast medium and a conversational tool are the ones that are discovering Twitters true power.
Twitter is
definitely a social network. Just because it's
asynchronous, to use Evan's word, doesn't change that a bit. What makes twitter such a useful and fun social network is that (unlike the other social networks) it can foster relationships with people you don't already know.
Twitter is both a social network and a CDP (content distribution platform). I disagree with the definition of social networks as …"a piece of technology that facilitates communication through existing social connections…people you already know."
Social networks are also used to connect with new people or reacquaint with people you knew in the past. Sites like LinkedIn and Classmates.com are examples.
The largest difference between Twitter and other social networks is that, natively, Twitter is not media-rich. Unless you have helper apps or special hooks, you won't see the content unless you click on the links people post.
Another huge difference is that there are more helper apps, web services, and so-called "marketing gurus" popping up all over the Web just for Twitter. There's not that kind of frenzy behind Facebook, MySpace or LinkedIn. Well, MySpace had that kind of activity but not so much now.
Twitter can be defined as a social networking; the reason being that it allows other people to interact with each other but not in the same way as facebook or myspace.
All these social networking sites serve different purposes as well as audiences and their behaviour/characteristics make them unique.
Hence one should not disregard the fact that they all create different types of platforms for social networking to the internet community where each individual/organisation can use it for their own subjective purposes or vice versa.
If I have to choose between the two descriptions, I'd way a content distribution. What I have found is that it is an incredible source of information and learning. So many knowledgeable people are putting links out there or providing opinions and experience. I've learned so much in the short time I've been involved.
The next question... how do you describe Twitter now after a week of being such a significant resource available to follow the events unfolding in Iran?
I think Twitter is a communication channel. Whether or not you consider it a social network is how you define a social network.
I think it is relevant for sharing information and forming relationships which can be built offline if you choose to go to TweetUps and participate in the community.
Twitter was designed to be a public journal and a permission-based gps system :) In other words, you write what you are doing, thinking, feeling, etc. and where it's all going down at. You're essentially the author of your character in the global narrative that is human existence. Not only that, but other characters in this global story can read along and make decisions that impact their own mini-story based on inspiration from you.
Just look at the homepage for Twitter! It's intended purpose is written in the brilliant tweet-tabs "What? Why? How?"
If twitter's executives are repositioning the company to fit in the content distribution niche,
fantastic! They should change the website's description if that's what it's new core focus is.
The fact that social media marketing firms are popping up left and right is
not evidence that Twitter's intended use is Content Distribution and Professional Networking. It's simply evidence that once a money making idea hits the
tipping point (Thanks Gladwell!), everybody looking for fast money will jump on the bandwagon.
If Twitter is intended to be content distribution, use it as such (but Twitter should come out and say so). However, if it's intended to be a social network (and based on Twitter's own website description, it's a STRONG TIE networking site), then use it as such. Your product and service is part of the story, so feel free to weave it in.
I heart twitter.
I heard Biz Stone speak at the Cannes Advertising Festival specific on this topic. here's a summary of what he said. Hope it helps and thanks, Simon
http://adjix.com/7ae8
Defining a social network as a community for "existing social connections" or "encapsulating real world connections" seems flawed. Many people form relationships through all social networks, Myspace, Facebook, LinkedIn, and Twitter included, that did not previously exist in the real world and may never.
Seems to me that Twitter is a new communication channel and like any channel, you need to understand how best to use it - to affect your audience. Twitter's use as a content distribution platform (sigh)has already dropped off for me - mostly what is out there is asinine rubbish and there's more and more twit tosh posted everyday. Marketers, hypemeisters, meedja whores and celebs and their watchers are following and followed. So what? Get cute, get clear and calm down. Much of the money made out of twitter activity, is part of the false economics of the intranet. How do you evalutate the quality of the information, the integrity of the source or the value to your social interaction or your business? Oh yeah - some marketing dude will tell you about it... hmmm. social network, content distribution platform - whatever...
Twitter is a socially driven content distribution network. I wouldn't defined it purely as a social network since it's not really meant to exist as a network of your friends. Anyone can follow you and you can follow anyone else.